AMERICAN   CRISIS   BIOGRAPHIES 

Edited  by 

Ellis  Paxson  Oberholtzer,  Ph.  D. 


Gbe  Hmertcan  Crisis  Biographies 

Edited  by  Ellis  Paxson  Oberholtzer,  Ph.D.  With  the 
counsel  and  advice  of  Professor  John  B.  McMaster,  of 
the  University  of  Pennsylvania. 

Each  i2mo,  cloth,  with  frontispiece  portrait.  Price 
$1.25  net;  by  mail,  $1.37. 

These  biographies  will  constitute  a  complete  and  comprehensive 
history  of  the  great  American  sectional  struggle  in  the  form  of  readable 
and  authoritative  biography.  The  editor  has  enlisted  the  co-operation 
of  many  competent  writers,  as  will  be  noted  from  the  list  given  below. 
An  interesting  feature  of  the  undertaking  is  that  the  series  is  to  be  im- 
pactial,  Southern  writers  having  been  assigned  to  Southern  subjects  and 
Northern  writers  to  Northern  subjects,  but  all  will  belong  to  the  younger 
generation  of  writers,  thus  assuring  freedom  from  any  suspicion  of  war 
time  prejudice.  The  Civil  War  will  not  be  treated  as  a  rebellion,  but  as 
the  great  event  in  the  history  of  our  nation,  which,  after  forty  years,  it 
is  now  clearly  recognized  to  have  been. 

Now  ready : 

Abraham  Lincoln.     By  ELLIS  PAXSON  OBERHOLTZER. 
Thomas  H.  Benton.     By  JOSEPH  M.  ROGERS. 
David  G.  Farragut.     By  JOHN  R.  SPEARS. 
William  T.  Sherman.     By  EDWARD  ROBINS. 
Frederick  Douglass.     By  BOOKER  T.  WASHINGTON. 
Judah  P.  Benjamin.     By  PIERCE  BUTLER. 
Robert  E.  Lee.     By  PHILIP  ALEXANDER  BRUCE. 
Jefferson  Davis.     By  PROF.  W.  E.  DODD. 
Alexander  H.  Stephens.     BY  Louis  PENDLETON. 
John  C.  Calhoun.     By  GAILLARD  HUNT. 
"  Stonewall"  Jackson.     By  HENRY  ALEXANDER  WHITE. 
John  Brown.     By  W.  E.  BURGHARDT  DUBOIS. 
Charles  Sumner.     By  PROF.  GEORGE  H.  HAYNES. 

In  preparation : 

Daniel  Webster.     By  PROF.  C.  H.  VAN  TYNE. 
William  Lloyd  Garrison.     By  LINDSAY  SWIFT. 
William  H.  Seward.     By  EDWARD  EVERETT  HALE,  Jr. 
Stephen  A.  Douglas.     By  PROF.  HENRY  PARKER  WILLIS. 
Thaddeus  Stevens.     By  PROF.  J.  A.  WOODBURN. 
Andrew  Johnson.      BY  PROF.  WALTER  L.  FLEMING. 
Henry  Clay.     By  THOMAS  H.  CLAY. 
Ulysses  S.  Grant.     By  PROF.  FRANKLIN  S.  EDMONDS. 
Edwin  M.  Stanton.     By  EDWIN  S.  CORWIN. 
Jay  Cooke.     By  ELLIS  PAXSON  OBERHOLTZER. 


A/" 


AMERICAN  CRISIS  BIOGRAPHIES 


CHARLES  SUMNER 


by 


GEORGE   H.  HAYNES,  Ph.D. 

Professor  of  History  in  the  Worcester.  Polytechnic  Institute 


PHILADELPHIA 

GEORGE  W.  JACOBS  &  COMPANY 
PUBLISHERS 


COPYRIGHT,  1909,  BY 
GEORGE  W.  JACOBS  &  COMPANY 

Published  November, 


All  rights  reserved 
Printed  in  U.  S.  A. 


PREFACE 

TIME  has  dealt  very  differently  with  the  leading 
characters  in  the  great  drama  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  At  the  end  of  the  war,  in  the  opinion  of 
the  best  informed  and  most  judicial  historian  of  the 
period,  Abraham  Lincoln  and  Charles  Sumner  were 
"the  two  most  influential  men  in  public  life."  On 
the  very  day  of  his  death,  the  President  intimated 
that  the  thwarting  of  his  reconstruction  policy  had 
been  due  to  Sumner' s  opposition. 

To-day  Lincoln's  name  is  a  household  word  ;  his 
memory  is  revered  hardly  less  in  the  South  than  in 
the  North  ;  the  new  generation  understands  and  ap 
preciates  him  far  better  than  did  the  men  among 
whom  his  work  was  done.  But  Sumner' s  figure  has 
been  crowded  into  the  background.  Ask  intelligent 
men  of  affairs  born  since  1860  for  an  account  of 
his  character  and  career,  and  few  will  recall  more 
than  that  he  was  an  anti-slavery  orator,  whose 
assault  by  Brooks  in  the  Senate  chamber  greatly  in 
tensified  the  bitterness  between  North  and  South. 
What  manner  of  impress  Sumner  is  making  upon 
yet  younger  America  was  tested  a  few  months  ago 
in  the  examination  of  applicants  for  admission  to 
a  Massachusetts  college.  Not  one  in  ten  of  those 
boys  in  the  commonwealth  which  Sumner  had  so 
long  and  so  honorably  represented,  showed  any  in 
telligent  knowledge  of  the  man.  One  replied : 
"  Charles  Sumner  was  always  held  in  respect  even 


340218 


6  PBEFACE 

by  the  people  of  the  South.  Fort  Sumner,  Charles- 
town,  was  named  in  his  honor,'7 — an  honor  which 
several  of  the  other  papers  also  accorded  him  !  Of 
six  histories  of  the  United  States  in  use  in  leading 
secondary  schools,  two  leave  Sumner  insensible  at 
Brooks1  s  feet,  two  others  have  not  a  word  to  say  of 
any  act  of  Sumner' s  after  the  assault,  while  the 
others  go  little  further  than  to  state  the  bare  and 
barren  facts  that  he  held  tenaciously  to  a  peculiar 
theory  of  reconstruction,  that  he  strove  to  secure 
equal  civil  rights  for  the  freedmen,  and  that  he 
quarreled  with  Grant. 

Some  reasons  for  this  lessened  interest  in  Sumner 
are  not  far  to  seek.  Unlike  Lincoln,  he  outlived 
his  best  days.  His  most  characteristic  and  benefi 
cent  labors  belonged  to  the  epoch  closed  by  the  war  ; 
their  fruits  were  merged  in  its  triumphs.  His  later 
years  brought  misfortunes  in  full  train :  domestic 
sorrow,  racking  illness,  the  loss  of  friends  and  cease 
less  struggle  over  the  problems  of  reconstruction, 
with  some  of  which  he  was  little  fitted  to  cope.  Sum 
ner  had  his  foibles  and  faults  ;  no  attempt  has  here 
been  made  to  gloss  them  over.  He  made  mistakes, 
some  of  which  were  fraught  with  disaster.  Never 
theless,  I  believe  that  he  deserves  of  his  country  a 
more  grateful  remembrance  than  has  been  accorded 
him,  and  that  both  a  true  historical  perspective  and 
the  inculcation  of  virile  American  ideals  call  upon 
the  writers  and  teachers  of  history  to  bring  Sumner 
forward  into  clearer  light. 

The  task  of  writing  a  brief  biography  of  Sumner 
is  made  difficult  not  by  the  lack  of  material,  but 


PKEFACE  7 

rather  by  its  abundance.  From  the  hour  of  his 
election  to  the  Senate,  Sumner  never  doubted  that 
he  was  an  historic  personage.  He  devoted  an  enor 
mous  amount  of  time  to  editing  his  Works:  in 
these  fifteen  volumes  of  his  speeches  he  meant  that 
we  should  read  his  life  as  he  saw  it  related  to  the 
great  events  in  which  he  was  taking  part.  Thou 
sands  of  letters  written  by  him  are  preserved.  In 
the  Suinuer  Collection  in  the  library  of  Harvard 
University  are  40,000  letters  received  by  him  from 
men  of  leading  in  many  lands,  as  well  as  news 
paper  clippings  and  documents  in  rich  profusion. 

Sumner  was  fortunate  in  having  as  his  biographer 
Mr.  Edward  L.  Pierce,  who  for  thirty  years  had 
been  his  intimate  friend.  His  Memoir  and  Letters  of 
Charles  Sumner  is  a  marvel  of  research  hardly  equaled 
in  painstaking  conscientiousness  and  completeness 
by  any  other  biography  of  recent  years.  Its  four 
bulky  volumes  represent  nineteen  years  of  almost  un 
remitting  labor,  and  contain  but  a  quarter  part  less 
reading  matter  than  the  Nicolay-Hay  biography  of 
Lincoln.  But  the  very  completeness  of  Mr.  Pierce' s 
work  bars  its  use  by  any  but  the  specialist.  It  is 
1 t  conceived  on  a  scale  which  assumes  in  the  reader  an 
interest  in  the  subject,  and  an  indifference  to  toil, 
commensurate  with  those  of  the  author.  .  .  . 
Life  simply  does  not  suffice  for  literature  laid  out  on 
such  a  Brobdingnagian  scale  ;  all  sense  of  proportion 
is  absent  from  it."1  Mr.  Pierce  himself  justified 
the  scope  of  his  work  on  the  ground  that  a  com 
plete  biography  would  prove  "a  thesaurus  which 

1  C.  F.  Adams,  Lee  at  Appomattox  and  Other  Papers,  p.  147. 


8  PEEFACE 

can  be  drawn  upon  by  the  authors  of  briefer  lives. " 
Certain  it  is  that  more  than  one  biographer  of 
Sumner  has  sunk  his  shafts  deep  in  Pierce' s  Memoir 
while  paying  surprisingly  scanty  royalties  of  ac 
knowledgment  for  the  ore  extracted. 

Whatever  value  may  be  possessed  by  any  later 
life  of  Sumner  must  consist  far  less  in  its  discovery 
of  new  material  than  in  its  perspective,  its  point  of 
view.  Thirty-five  years,  a  full  generation,  have 
passed  since  Sumner' s  death.  His  work  has  been 
put  to  the  test  in  the  searching  fires  of  reconstruc 
tion.  Day  by  day  our  dealings  with  the  peoples  of 
our  new  insular  possessions  are  bringing  into  ques 
tion  doctrines  which  Sunnier  held  to  be  absolute 
and  impregnable.  Experience  in  South  Africa  is 
proving  to-day  how  rapidly  trust  may  make  friends 
out  of  conquered  foes.  The  time  may  have  come 
for  a  new  attempt  to  tell  the  story  of  Sumner' s  life 
and  to  appraise  his  service. 

Unfortunately  the  second  volume  of  i  l  The  Letters 
and  Journals  of  Samuel  Gridley  Howe  "  and  "  The 
Diary  of  Gideon  Welles''  were  not  available  until 
most  of  this  book  was  in  type. 

Among  the  many  who  have  helped  me  from  their 
personal  knowledge  of  Sumner,  I  wish  to  mention 
here  with  special  gratitude  Dr.  Edward  Everett 
Hale,  whom  we  all  mourn,  Dr.  Samuel  A.  Green, 
President  Andrew  D.  White,  and  Mr.  Arnold  B. 
Johnson,  who  during  most  of  Sumner' s  public  life 
was  his  secretary  and  intimate  friend. 

G.  H.  H. 


CONTENTS 


,,  'II. 
III. 

\  IV. 
V. 

I. 

VII. 

VIII. 

IX. 

X. 


XVII. 


CHRONOLOGY    

PARENTAGE  AND  YOUTH  . 

CHOICE  OF  A  PROFESSION 

EUROPEAN  TRAVEL  .... 

"  No.  4  COURT  STREET  " 

"  THE  TRUE  GRANDEUR  OF  NA 
TIONS"  

SUMNER'S  ENLISTMENT  IN  THE  ANTI- 
SLAVERY  BANKS  .... 

MASSACHUSETTS  AND  THE  COMPRO 
MISE  :  SUMNER'S  ELECTION  TO  THE 
SENATE 

SENATE  BEGINNINGS  :  "  FREEDOM 
NATIONAL,  SLAVERY  SECTIONAL" 

POLITICAL  E EVOLUTION  IN  MASSA 
CHUSETTS  ... 

"THE  CRIME  AGAINST  KANSAS," 
AND  THE  BROOKS  ASSAULT  . 

IN  QUEST  OF  HEALTH 

"  THE  BARBARISM  OF  SLAVERY  "    . 

WAR  PROBLEMS  :  THE  TRENT  AF 
FAIR  

SUMNER  AND  LINCOLN 

JOHNSON  AND  EECONSTRUCTION 
SUMNER    AND    GRANT  * "'  THE    SAN 

DOMINGO  ISSUE     <a 
SUMNER  AND  GRANT*?  THE  TREATY 

OF  WASHINGTON 


11 

15 
81 
45 
64 

78 
91 


115 
138 
159 

188 
221 
231 

247 

m 

295 
329 
354 


10  CONTENTS 

XVIII.    SUMNER'S  PERSONALITY  AND  CHAR 
ACTERISTICS  384 

XIX.    CIVIL    EIGHTS  AND  THE  BATTLE- 
FLAG      EESOLUTION  :      CLOSING 

SCENES 412 

XX.  SUMNER'S  LEADERSHIP  .  .  .  438 
BIBLIOGRAPHY  ....  452 
INDEX  .  454 


7 

1    y 


CHRONOLOGY  7 

1811 — Born  in  Boston,  Mass.,  January  6th. 

1826— Enters  Harvard  College.  Is  graduated,  1830.  Student 
in  Harvard  Law  School,  1831-1833. 

1834 — Visits  Washington,  and  is  strongly  repelled  by  political 
life  as  a  career.  Admitted  to  the  bar,  and  begins  prac 
tice  in  Boston.  Edits  legal  journals  and  reports.  Inti 
mate  with  W.  E.  Channing  and  Francis  Lieber. 

1837-1840 — European  tour,  which  immensely  broadens  Sum- 
ner's  horizon,  awakens  his  appreciation  of  art,  gives  him 
facile  command  of  French,  German  and  Italian,  a  knowl 
edge  of  the  politics  and  jurisprudence  and  an  intimate 
acquaintance  with  many  of  the  leaders  in  public  life  and 
in  letters  in  England,  France  and  Germany, — an  indis 
pensable  preparation  for  his  unsuspected  career. 

J842— Maintains  the  "  right  of  inquiry."  Cooperates  with  Dr. 
Channing  in  condemning  Webster's  treatment  of  the 
Creole  case. 

1843— Defends  Mackenzie's  action  in  the  Somers  mutiny.  Be 
comes  instructor  in  the  Law  School.  Contributes  fre 
quently  to  the  Law  Reporter. 

1845 — Cooperates  with  Horace  Mann  for  the  improvement  of 
the  system  of  public  education  in  Massachusetts.  July 
4th,  delivers  the  city  oration,  "The  True  Grandeur  of 
Nations, ' '  which  straightway  gives  him  more  than  national 
fame  as  an  orator,  and  as  a  champion  of  Freedom  and 
of  Peace.  Phi  Beta  Kappa  Address  at  Harvard.  Gains 
prominence  as  lecturer  and  reformer.  'Prison  Discipline 
debates  give  valuable  training,  but  arouse  enmity. 

1847 — Denounces  R.  C.  Winthrop's  vote  in  Congress  on  the 
Mexican  War  bill.  The  controversy  puts  Sumner  for 
ward  as  the  champion  of  the  Conscience  Whigs,  and  an 
tagonizes  conservatives.  Is  nominated  for  Congress,  bnt 
withdraws  his  name. 


12  CHEONOLOGY 

1848 — Active  in  the  organization  of  the  Free  Soil  party,  in  re 
volt  at  the  Whig  nomination  of  Taylor. 

1851 — Put  forward  by  the  Free  Soilers  in  coalition  with  Demo 
crats,  for  the  United  States  Senate.  Elected  by  majority 
of  one  vote,  after  a  deadlock  in  the  legislature  of  more 
than  '  three  months.  Takes  seat  in  Senate.  In  first 
speech — a  tribute  to  Kossuth — he  opposes  any  belliger 
ent  intervention  in  European  affairs. 

1852 — In  first  formal  Senate  speech,  arraigns  Fugitive  Slave 
Law  :  u  Freedom  national :  Slavery  sectional." 

1854 — Opposes  repeal  of  Missouri  Compromise.  Vindicates  pe 
tition  of. New  England  clergy.  Opposition  angers  South 
ern  senators.  Assails  Knownothingism. 

1856 — Angered  by  Sumner's  speech,  "  The  Crime  Against  Kan 
sas,"  Preston  S.  Brooks  assaults  him  in  the  Senate 
chamber,  May  22d.  After  months  of  invalidisni  Sumner 
is  welcomed  home,  November  3d,  as  the  martyr  of  free 
speech,  by  the  governor  of  the  commonwealth,  the  mayor 
of  Boston,  and  a  vast  throng  of  citizens.  1856-1859 
spent  in  disheartening  struggle  for  health.  Meantime 
Massachusetts  reelects  him  to  the  Senate. 

1859-1860— Return  to  the  Senate.     "The  Barbarism  of  Slav- 


1861-1862 — Unyielding  in  opposition  to  all  schemes  of  com 
promise.  Made  chairman  of  Foreign  Relations  Commit 
tee.  In  October,  1861,  the  first  statesman  of  prominence 
to  demand  the  policy  of  emancipation.  In  Trent  case, 
insists  on  surrender  of  Mason  and  Slidell.  Puts  forward 
his  theory  of  reconstruction  by  Congress  in  states  which 
had  "  become  felo  de  se." 

1863 — Third  election  to  Senate.  Puts  stop  to  letters  of  marque 
and  reprisal.  Blocks  resolutions  which  would  have  em 
broiled  United  States  with  France.  Important  corre 
spondence  with  Bright,  Cobden  and  the  Duke  of  Argyll. 
Cooper  Institute  speech  on  "  Foreign  Relations." 

1864 — Struggles  to  secure  equal  rights,  including  equal  suf 
frage,  for  colored  people.  Initiates  movement  for  civil 
service  reform.  Champions  Lincoln's  reelection,  after 
"  the  Chicago  treason."  Secures  Chase's  appointment  as 
Chief-Justice. 


CHRONOLOGY  13 

1865 — Opposes  ret  i-iati  m  war,  and  imposes  restraints  in  the 
interest  of  civilization.  Obstructs  Lincoln's  plan  of  re 
construction.  Acoor  i  panics  the  presidential  party  to 
Richmond.  la  at  Lincoln's  death  bed.  Delivers  the 
eulogy  upon  Lincoln  before  Boston  city  government. 

1865-1869 — Struggles  over  reconstruction.  Advocates  equal 
suffrage,  free  homesteads  and  free  schools  for  Negroes. 
Death  of  mother.  Marriage.  Chief  supporter  of  Alaska 
purchase.  Establishes  new  home  in  Washington. 
Heartily  supports  Johnson's  impeachment  and  con 
viction. 

1869-1871— Fourth  election  to  the  Senate.  Opposes  Fifteenth 
Amendment.  Prevents  confirmation  of  Stewart  as  Sec 
retary  of  the  Treasury.  Approves  Motley's  appointment 
as  Minister  to  England.  In  speech  against  ratification 
of  Johnson-Clarendon  Convention,  sets  forth  "national 
claims"  against  England.  Opposes  annexation  of  San 
Domingo,  and  thus  antagonizes  Grant  and  Fish.  Re 
moved  from  chairmanship  of  Foreign  Relations  Commit 
tee.  Advocates  ratification  of  Treaty  of  Washington. 
Persistent  in  urging  Civil  Rights  Bill. 

1872 — Opposes  Grant's  renomination,  but  takes  no  part  in  fur 
thering  the  Liberal  Republican  movement.  Arraigns 
Grant  in  the  Senate.  Supports  Greeley.  Last  journey 
to  Europe.  Illness  compels  absence  from  Senate. 
Presents  "Battle-Flag"  resolution.  Censured  by  Mas 
sachusetts  legislature. 

1873 — Defeat  of  movement  to  rescind  censure.  Sumner  urges 
justice  to  Spain  in  Virginius  case.  Makes  last  appeal  for 
Civil  Rights  Bill. 

1874 — Massachusetts  legislature  rescinds  censure.  In  last 
speech  in  Senate,  Sumner  urges  national,  instead  of  in 
ternational,  commemoration  of  American  independence. 
Illness.  March  10th — his  last  day  in  Senate — is  present 
when  the  rescinding  resolution  is  presented.  Dies, 
March  llth.  Buried  in  Mount  Auburn,  March  16th. 
Commemoration  in  Congress,  April  27th.  Lamar's 
tribute. 


CHARLES  SUMNER 


CHAPTEE  I 

PARENTAGE  AND  YOUTH 

CHARLES  SUMNER  caine  but  slowly  to  a  knowl 
edge  of  himself.  His  life  was  more  than  half  spent 
before  he  recognized  his  real  task.  The  career 
which  then  suddenly  opened  before  him  was  a  sur 
prise  even  to  himself,  yet  it  was  no  accident.  From 
the  beginning,  both  heredity  and  environment, 
physical,  intellectual  and  moral,  had  been  develop 
ing  in  him  a  unique  combination  of  powers  of  mind 
and  heart.  When  the  crisis  came  which  called  him 
to  service,  it  found  him  fully  armed  for  the  fight.  s 

William  Sumner,  the  first  of  Charles  SunTnef's 
American  ancestors,  was  a  native  of  St.  Edburg  in 
the  county  of  Oxford,  England.  At  the  age  of 
thirty  he  moved  with  his  wife  and  three  sons  to  the 
town  of  Dorchester  in  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Col 
ony.  In  this  little  community,  which  had  been 
founded  only  five  or  six  years,  William  Sumner 
soon  came  to  be  a  man  of  influence.  He  was  ad 
mitted  to  the  freedom  of  the  colony  in  1637  and  ac 
quired  a]  grant  of  land.  He  was  elected  to  impor 
tant  offices  in  town  and  colony,  and  for  many  years 


16  CHAELES  SUMNER 

acted  as  a  commissioner  to  "try  and  issue  small 
causes.7'  From  him  in  the  seventh  generation 
descended  Charles  Suniner. 

With  two  exceptions  the  intervening  ancestors 
need  not  here  be  noted.  These  Sumners  of  Dor 
chester  and  Milton  were  generally  farmers,  in 
moderate  circumstances,  and  with  families  of 
patriarchal  numbers.  Among  all  these  sturdy 
forebears  of  Charles  Sumner  there  is  but  one  to 
whom  life  offered  much  of  variety  or  romance. 
Charles  Sumner' s  grandfather  bore  the  singularly 
inappropriate  name  of  Job.  When  he  was  seven 
teen  years  old,  his  father  died,  leaving  a 
widow  and  twelve  children.  After  working  a 
year  upon  a  neighbor's  farm,  Job  Sumner  de 
termined  to  get  a  liberal  education.  The  prepara 
tion  cost  him  a  hard  struggle,  but  he  finally  secured 
admission  to  the  freshman  class  of  Harvard  College. 
Six  months  had  not  passed  when  the  news  of  Lexing 
ton  entered  this  scholarly  retreat.  Forthwith  the 
college  betook  itself  to  Concord,  in  order  that  its 
dormitories  might  be  turned  into  barracks  for  the 
Continental  Army.  But  books  had  lost  their  lure 
for  Job  Sumner ;  he  remained  behind,  and  joined 
the  army,  receiving  the  rank  of  ensign.  As  a  re 
ward  for  distinguished  service  in  command  of  one 
of  the  armed  vessels  on  Lake  Champlain,  he  was 
presently  made  a  captain.  In  1779  it  fell  to  him 
for  some  time  to  have  charge  of  the  guard  over 
Major  Andre",  who  was  then  under  sentence  of 
death,  and  for  whom  he  came  to  have  a  sincere 


PAKENTAGE  AND  YOUTH  17 

regard.  In  1783  Major  Job  Sunnier  was  in  com 
mand  of  the  forces  which  guarded  New  York  dur 
ing  the  evacuation  of  the  British  troops,  and  at  the 
end  of  that  year  it  was  from  Sumner's  detachment 
that  Washington  received  the  last  military  salute 
of  the  Eevolutionary  Army.  Though  he  had  never 
entered  her  class-rooms  since  the  outbreak  of  the 
war,  in  1785  Harvard  College  was  proud  to  enroll 
him  in  the  class  to  which  he  had  belonged,  and  to 
confer  the  degree  of  Master  of  Arts  upon  "Major 
Job  Sumner,  .  .  .  who,  during  the  war,  be 
haved  with  reputation  as  a  man  and  as  an  officer. " 

In  1785  he  was  appointed  by  Congress  "a  com 
missioner  for  settling  the  accounts  between  the  Con 
federation  and  the  State  of  Georgia,"  a  task  which 
occupied  him  until  the  time  of  his  death  in  1789, 
aged  thirty-five.  At  his  funeral  in  New  York  the 
regard  for  him  as  a  public  servant  was  shown  by 
the  attendeuce  of  the  Vice-President,  the  Secretary 
of  War,  and  the  senators  and  representatives  in  Con 
gress  from  Massachusetts. 

Job  Sumner  was  a  red-blooded  man.  He  loved 
the  life  of  a  soldier.  He  made  friends  readily, 
entertained  freely,  and  was  easily  imposed  upon, 
his  generosity  of  mind  and  of  purse  leading  to  his  be 
ing  seriously  embarrassed  through  imprudent  loans 
to  friends.  That  he  touched  life  at  many  points  is 
indicated  by  the  variety  of  his  reading.  In  those 
days  of  few  books,  his  collection  included  an  eight- 
volume  edition  of  Shakespeare,  "Don  Quixote, " 
"Junius,"  "The  Wealth  of  Nations,'7  "Anecdotes 


18  CHAELES  SUMNER 

of  Dr.  Johnson,"  a  "History  of  England,"  and 
Lord  Chesterfield's  "  Letters  to  his  Son."  The  last 
is  significant,  for  in  this  brave,  adventurous  and 
capable  man  nothing  is  more  admirable  than  the 
anxious  solicitude  and  shrewd  sense  which  appear 
in  the  Chesterfieldian  letters  written  to  the  teachers 
to  whom  he  had  entrusted  his  son's  education. 

From  the  academy  at  Andover  this  son,  Charles 
Pinckney  Sumner,  entered  Harvard  College  and 
was  duly  graduated  in  1796.  A  number  of  effu 
sions,  for  the  most  part  in  stiff  and  stilted  verse, 
are  the  principal  memorials  of  his  student  days. 
They  deal  with  lofty  themes  and  show  genuine 
fineness  of  feeling.  Four  lines  from  "The  Com 
pass"  are  significant,  for  they  hold  up  the  very 
ideals,  peace  and  freedom  and  equal  rights,  to  which 
his  famous  son's  life  was  to  be  devoted  : 

"More  true  inspir'd,  we  antedate  the  time 
When  futile  war  shall  cease  thro'  every  clime  ; 
No  sanction'd  slavery  Afric's  sous  degrade, 
But  equal  rights  shall  equal  earth  pervade.'' 

Upon  leaving  college,  the  young  man  seemed  to 
have  no  decided  bent ;  he  taught  school  for  a  few 
years,  then  studied  law,  and  in  the  year  1799  took 
a  desk  in  the  office  of  Josiah  Quincy.  Shrewd  Job 
Sumner  had  urged  that  at  the  academy  his  son 
should  learn  "eloquence  and  manners,  as  well 
as  wisdom  and  the  languages,"  adding,  "I  lay 
great  stress  on  the  first  two  accomplishments,  be 
cause  I  think  them  very  essential,  and  by  far  the 


PARENTAGE  AND  YOUTH  19 

% 

most  difficult  for  Charles  to  attain."  Conscien 
tious  in  all  things,  he  did  attain  eloquence  and 
manners,  but  both  were  heavy  and  came  only  with 
obvious  effort.  Like  John  Quincy  Adams  and 
many  other  young  men,  he  broke  away  from  the 
Federalist  party ;  his  speeches  and  letters  show 
that  the  feeling  which  chiefly  dominated  his  poli 
tics  at  this  period  was  opposition  to  the  aristo 
cratic  and  sectionalizing  tendencies  of  the  Federal 
ists,  who  seemed  to  him  "  disposed  to  erect  New 
England  into  a  separate  government."  In  later 
life,  perhaps  because  of  his  official  position,  he 
ceased  to  take  much  interest  in  party  politics. 

In  the  spring  of  1810  Mr.  Sumner  was  married  to 
Belief  Jacob,  in  the  modest  frame  house  which  he 
had  hired  at  the  southeast  corner  of  what  are  now 
Eevere  and  Irving  Streets,  in  Boston.  Here  all  but 
the  youngest  of  their  nine  children  were  born. 
Years  later  they  removed  to  No.  20  Hancock 
Street,  which  remained  the  home  of  the  family 
until  1867. 

Mr.  Sumner' s  legal  practice  was  not  successful. 
He  was  deeply  learned  in  the  law,  but  his  pains 
taking  study  and  note-taking  did  not  fit  him  for 
effective  court  or  office  practice.  As  a  result,  he 
came  to  be  mainly  a  collector  of  small  bills.  By 
1819  his  children  numbered  five  ;  his  income  was 
making  no  gain,  and  the  problem  of  educating  his 
sons  and  daughters  became  a  pressing  one.  With 
a  hope  of  bettering  his  finances,  he  dropped  his 
practice  to  become  a  deputy  sheriff,— an  office 


20  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

which,  however,  then  yielded  less  than  one  thousand 
dollars  a  year.  The  turn  in  the  tide  of  his  affairs 
came  in  1825  when  Governor  Lincoln  appointed 
him  Sheriff  of  Suffolk  County,  a  position  which  he 
continued  to  hold  by  appointment  of  successive  gov 
ernors  until  a  few  days  before  his  death  in  1839. 
He  had  nothing  of  Job  Sumner's  ease  and  cordial 
friendliness  with  strangers,  and  neither  courted  nor 
won  popularity  ;  but  men  upon  the  bench  bore  wit 
ness  to  his  fidelity  and  efficiency,  and  the  governors 
kept  him  in  office  because  of  his  sterling  merit,  not 
withstanding  some  popular  opposition. 

For  his  services  as  sheriff,  including  the  custody 
of  the  county  jail,  he  received  from  $2,000  to  $3,000 
a  year,  which  enabled  the  family  to  live  far  more 
liberally  and  even  to  make  some  accumulation.  He 
took  his  new  duties,  like  everything  else,  most 
seriously ;  he  delved  into  the  remote  history  of 
the  development  of  the  office  both  in  England  and 
America,  and  showed  true  Sumuer  tenacity  in 
maintaining  with  dignity  his  own  opinion  as  to  the 
nature  and  scope  of  the  sheriff's  powers  in  opposi 
tion  to  the  view  taken  by  the  Supreme  Court. 

He  renounced  his  early  connection  with  the 
Masons,  and  took  an  active  part  in  the  anti-Ma 
sonic  movement.  The  temperance  question  aroused 
his  interest,  and  he  lectured  upon  it,  denouncing  the 
licensing  of  liquor-selling  as  immoral.  He  was  an 
early  and  urgent  advocate  of  public  school  improve 
ment.  But  the  cause  which  appealed  to  him  most 
strongly  was  the  anti-slavery  movement.  He  did 


PAEENTAGE  AND  YOUTH  21 

not  publicly  ally  himself  with  the  Abolitionists,  but 
he  was  outspoken  iu  his  condemnation  of  slavery, 
and  unusually  far-sighted  as  to  its  consequences.  A 
neighbor  recalled  his  remarking  as  early  as  1820, 
"  Our  children's  heads  will  some  day  be  broken  on 
a  cunnon-ball  on  this  question. "  In  private  and  in 
official  intercourse  he  treated  negroes  with  studied 
courtesy  and  kindness.  Charles  Suinner's  extreme 
views  of  human  equality  came  naturally  to  the  son 
of  a  man  who  condemned  social  aversion  to  the 
negro  and  the  exclusion  of  negro  children  from  the 
public  schools ;  who  said  that  he  should  be  ' i  en 
tirely  willing  to  sit  on  the  bench  with  a  negro  judge  "  ; 
and  who  put  himself  on  record  against  the  law  pro 
hibiting  the  intermarriage  of  blacks  and  whites. 

With  Sheriff  Sumner  religion  was  less  a  matter  of 
creed  than  of  honorable  living.  In  his  early  years 
he  attended  Trinity  (Protestant  Episcopal)  Church, 
but  after  1825  the  family  occupied  a  pew  in  King's 
Chapel  (Unitarian).  He  had  no  sympathy  with 
sectarianism,  and  condemned  in  word  and  practice 
the  fanatical  antagonism  of  his  day  against  Eoman 
Catholics.  The  dominant  note  in  his  character  was 
an  almost  morbid  conscientiousness.  In  his  home, 
not  less  than  in  his  official  duties,  he  was  formal 
and  punctilious  ;  his  children's  manners  and  educa 
tion  received  his  anxious  care.  He  aroused  in  them 
his  own  love  of  history  and  of  varied  knowledge. 
But,  especially  in  his  later  years,  life  took  on  a 
gloomy  tone.  He  gamed  no  new  friends  and  "  his 
rigid  and  cheerless  nature  was  not  one  which  makes 


22  CHARLES  SUMNER 

a  happy  home."  The  love  which  he  received  from 
his  children  had  more  of  dutifulness  than  of  warm  th. 

Upon  the  maternal  side,  the  first  of  Charles  Sum 
ner' s  American  ancestors  was  Nicholas  Jacob,  of 
Hingham,  England,  who  established  himself  in 
Hiugham,  Massachusetts,  in  1633.  From  him  de 
scended  a  line  of  thrifty  farmers,  the  fourth  of  whom 
was  David  Jacob,  Sr.,  a  man  of  broad  acres,  Tpho 
was  often  called  to  office,  and  who  served  during  the 
Eevolution  on  the  Committee  of  Public  Safety.  His 
granddaughter,  Belief  Jacob,  at  the  time  w'hen 
Charles  Pinckney  Sumner  married  her,  had  for 
some  years  been  supporting  herself  as  a  seamstress, 
and  from  this  early  experience  she  brought  to  her 
new  home  a  talent  for  shrewd  household  manage 
ment,  much  needed  where  the  income  was  so  small 
and  the  family  rapidly  growing.  Mrs.  Sumner  was 
a  most  devoted  mother.  It  fell  to  her  lot  to  care  for 
three  of  her  daughters  through  long  and  fatal  ill- 
nesses;  of  her  nine  children  but  two,  Charles  and 
his  youngest  sister,  survived  her.  Yet  through  her 
long  and  arduous  life  she  kept  her  poise  as  a  woman 
of  strength  and  cheer,  the  family's  unfailing  source 
of  help  and  encouragement. 

Charles  Sumner  and  a  twin  sister  were  born  Jan 
uary  6,  1811,  the  eldest  of  Sheriff  Sumner' s  nine 
children.  The  Boston  of  his  boyhood  days  he  re 
called  in  after  years  as  a  "neat,  trim,  well-ordered 
place  "  of  about  40,000  inhabitants.  It  was  a  pros 
perous  and  conservative  community,  with  Faneuil 
Hall  still  the  scene  of  its  town  -meeting  government. 


PARENTAGE  AND  YOUTH  23 

Its  population  was  homogeneous  as  compared  with 
that  of  to-day,  and  wide  social  contrasts  were  un 
known.  As  a  man  of  education  and  a  holder  of  re 
sponsible  office,  Charles  Pinckuey  Sumner  asso 
ciated  with  cultivated  people,  but  his  narrow  means 
and  possibly  his  politics  constituted  a  barrier  to  the 
family's  moving  among  those  of  most  wealth  and  in 
fluence. 

The  first  steps  in  the  boy's  education  were  taken 
in  a  private  infant  school  taught  by  his  mother's 
sister  in  a  room  of  the  Sumner  house.  It  was  at  first 
the  father's  intention  to  have  him  taught  only  in 
English  branches,  that  he  might  the  sooner  be  fitted 
to  eke  out  the  family's  slender  income.  But  when 
he  found  that  with  chance  pennies  the  boy  had 
bought  from  a  classmate  some  elementary  Latin 
books  and  had  been  study  ing  them  to  good  purpose, 
he  relented,  and  in  August,  1821,  Charles  was  en 
tered  for  a  five-year  course  at  the  Boston  Latin 
School.  Among  his  schoolmates  here  were  not  a 
few  with  whom  he  was  to  be  closely  associated  in 
later  life  :  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  George  S.  Hillard, 
James  Freeman  Clarke,  Samuel  F.  Smith,  and  Wen 
dell  Phillips.  They  remembered  him  as  an  over 
grown  and  a  rather  awkward  boy,— "Gawky" 
Sumner,  the  fellows  dubbed  him.  He  was  pure  of 
mind  and  speech,  thoughtful  and  retiring,  fond 
of  his  fellows,  and  well  liked  by  them.  He  cared 
little  for  most  sports,  but  was  enthusiastic  over 
swimming.  He  was  always  a  bookworm,  and,  al 
though  his  standing  in  his  class  was  rather  low,  he 


24  CHAKLES  SUMNEE 

frequently  surprised  the  boys  with  stray  bits  of  in 
formation  which  he  had  come  upon  in  his  browsing. 
Perhaps  at  the  instigation  of  his  father,  who  was  an 
inveterate  filler  of  note-books,  at  fourteen  years  of 
age  he  compiled  a  summary  of  English  history  from 
Caesar's  invasion  to  1801,  in  nearly  ninety  manuscript 
pages.  It  is  a  relief  to  note  that  he  was  still  enough 
of  a  boy  to  embellish  it  with  the  title  :  "  A  Chro 
nological  Compendium  of  English  History,  by 
Charles  Sumner.  Copyright  secured.  Boston, 
1825. "  A  year  later  he  was  reading  Gibbon,  and 
copying  passages  which  struck  his  liking.  Mean 
time,  although  his  scholarship  did  not  show  any  ex 
ceptional  promise,  he  won  several  prizes  for  transla 
tions  and  for  English  composition.  As  one  of  the 
six  boys  to  receive  Franklin  medals  at  the  end  of  his 
course,  it  was  his  privilege  to  attend  the  banquet 
that  afternoon  in  Faneuil  Hall,  at  which  most  of  the 
dignitaries  of  the  new  city  were  present,  and  to 
listen  to  an  address  by  President  John  Quiucy 
Adams.  Three  weeks  earlier  he  had  crowded  his 
way  into  that  famous  hall  to  hear  a  part  of  Webster's 
oration  on  Adams  and  Jefferson.  The  associations 
of  that  historic  forum  and  of  those  famous  statesman- 
orators  cannot  have  failed  to  make  a  deep  impres 
sion  upon  a  boy  of  his  latent  powers. 

As  the  end  of  his  Latin  School  course  drew  near, 
his  father  was  much  perplexed  over  the  problem  of 
his  further  education,  particularly  as  there  were  now 
seven  other  children  whose  future  must  be  con 
sidered.  Accordingly  he  sent  a  long  letter  of  in- 


PARENTAGE  AND  YOUTH  25 

quiry,  in  the  boy's  writing,  to  the  head  of  the 
"  American  Literary,  Scientific,  and  Military  Acad 
emy"  at  Middletowu,  Conn.  He  referred  to  his 
eight  children,  "  to  all  of  whom  I  wish  to  give  a 
useful  but  not  what  is  commonly  called  a  learned 
education.  My  means  enable  me  only  to  think  of 
usefulness."  He  added:  "But,  sir,  if  I  send  him 
at  all,  it  must  be  on  a  footing  of  those  who  seek 
employment,"  and  he  made  careful  inquiries  as  to 
the  nature  of  the  employment  there  available  ;— 
whether  it  would  be  disagreeable  to  the  boy's  feel 
ings,  or  of  such  a  menial  nature  that  it  would 
u  injure  him  in  the  estimation  of  those  lads  who  are 
now  his  associates,  among  whom  he  is  destined  to 
earn  his  living,  and,  I  hope,  sustain  a  respectable 
rank."  Three  weeks  after  the  sending  of  this  letter, 
however,  a  new  face  was  put  upon  the  situation  by  the 
appointment  of  Charles  Pinckney  Sumner  to  the  po 
sition  of  Sheriff  of  Suffolk  County.  This  opportune 
appointment  led  him  to  look  upon  Governor  Lincoln 
as  his  "  greatest  earthly  benefactor"  for  the  reason 
that  without  it  he  would  '  *  not  probably  have  sent  a 
son  to  college."  He  now  made  application  to  the 
Secretary  of  War  for  a  West  Point  cadetship  for  his 
son,  giving  Daniel  Webster  and  Joseph  Story  as  his 
own  references.  In  this  letter  he  says  of  the  boy  : 
"He  is  exceedingly  well  acquainted  with  history 
and  geography,  both  ancient  and  modern.  He 
knows  the  scenes  of  many  of  the  distinguished  battles 
of  ancient  and  modern  times,  and  the  characters  of 
the  heroes  who  figured  in  them.  He  has  a  strong 


26  CHAKLES  BUHNER 

sense  of  patriotic  pride,  and  a  devotion  to  the  wel 
fare  and  glory  of  bis  country.  He  is  now  at  the 
Latin  School  in  Boston,  and  in  August  next  will  be 
qualified  to  enter  the  University  at  Cambridge. 
He  prefers  the  Academy  at  West  Point. "  Years 
later  Mr.  Sunmer  again  declared  that  it  had  been 
Charles's  wish  to  enter  West  Point,  "  but  I  perceived 
it  to  be  a  hopeless  undertaking  to  procure  his  ad 
mission.'7  This  youthful  aspiration  for  the  life  of 
the  soldier  is  the  more  interesting  in  one  who  in  his 
maturer  years  became  a  most  passionate  apostle  of 
universal  peace.  With  the  betterment  in  the  family 
finances,  Sheriff  Sumner  seems  to  have  given  up  his 
former  belief  that  for  Charles  "the  life  of  a  scholar 
would  be  too  sedentary  and  inactive."  In  Septem 
ber,  1826,  Charles  Sumner  was  enrolled  as  a  freshman 
in  Harvard  College,  with  which  thereafter  to  the 
day  of  his  death  he  was  so  intimately  associated  that 
his  schoolboy  longings  for  West  Point  seem  almost 
incredible. 

He  was  now  fifteen  years  of  age,  one  of  the  youngest 
in  his  class.  His  rapid  growth  had  made  him  some 
what  ungainly  in  bearing ;  he  was  diffident,  yet  by 
no  means  lacking  in  dignity.  Excellently  trained 
in  the  Latin  School,  he  soon  distinguished  himself 
particularly  in  translations  from  the  classics.  In 
history,  literature  and  forensics  he  excelled,  showing 
great  earnestness  and  self-possession  in  debate.  But 
for  mathematics  and  kindred  subjects  he  had  not 
the  slightest  aptitude.  It  is  recalled  that  in  one 
recitation  he  flunked  dismally,  saying  :  "  You  know 


PAKENTAGE  AND  YOUTH  27 

I  don't  pretend  to  know  anything  about  mathemat 
ics  !"  u  Suinner  !  Mathematics  !  mathematics  ! " 
cried  the  instructor.  "Don't  you  know  the  differ 
ence?  This  is  not  mathematics  !  This  is  physics  ! " 
Disgusted  by  his  failures,  he  soon  began  to  slight 
the  irksome  subjects,  devoting  himself  with  zest  to 
miscellaneous  literature.  This  prevented  his  attain 
ing  high  rank — he  was  barely  above  the  average  of 
his  class — but  none  of  its  members  was  more  widely 
read,  and  his  phenomenal  memory  made  the  harvest 
of  this  reading  always  available.  One  somewhat 
unfortunate  result  was  that  from  this  time  on  his 
conversation,  letters  and  addresses  became  over 
weighted  with  quotations,  particularly  from  the 
classics.  In  the  junior  and  senior  exhibitions  he 
had  inconspicuous  parts  ;  in  the  former,  a  Greek 
dialogue,  he  extolled  the  profession  of  the  orator  ;  in 
the  latter,  he  gave  a  somewhat  discriminating  and 
favorable  characterization  of  Napoleon.  In  his 
senior  year  Sumuer  won  a  prize  of  thirty  dollars  by 
an  essay  of  considerable  merit ;  its  chief  defect  was 
a  lack  of  condensation,  for,  as  one  of  his  classmates 
said,  Sumner  was  always  "too  full  of  matter." 
With  this  prize  money  he  bought  books, — Burton's 
"  Anatomy  of  Melancholy,"  Byron's  Poems,  "  Pil 
grim's  Progress,"  Hazlitt's  "  Select  British  Poets" 
and  Harvey's  "  Shakespeare. "  l 

1  These  last  two  were  constantly  upon  his  desk  in  later  years. 
At  his  death,  the  Shakespeare  was  found  open  at  the  page  where 
he  had  marked  the  lines  : 

"  Would  I  were  dead  ;  if  God's  good  will  were  so  : 
For  what  is  in  this  world,  but  grief  and  woe  ?  " 


28  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

Half  the  members  of  Simmer's  class  were  assigned 
parts  upon  the  commencement  stage.  But  for  his 
father's  urging,  Sumner  would  have  declined  to  ac 
cept  his  part,  a  discussion  of  "  The  Eeligious  Notions 
of  the  North  American  Indians." 

As  a  college  student  Sumner  was  on  good  terms 
with  the  faculty  as  well  as  with  fellow  students. 
On  only  one  subject  is  there  record  of  any  friction. 
Sumner  was  always  tenacious  of  his  own  opinion, 
and  then,  as  in  later  life,  he  liked  individuality  in 
his  own  attire.  He  affected  a  "cloak  of  blue  camlet 
lined  with  red,"  and  a  buff-colored  waistcoat.  Now 
among  the  rules  of  the  college  as  to  student's  dress 
was  the  requirement  that  the  waistcoat  be  of  u  black- 
mixed,  or  black  ;  or,  when  of  cotton  or  linen  fabric, 
of  white."  Accordingly  Sumner  was  several  times 
summoned  before  the  " Parietal  Board"  and  once 
received  formal  "  admonition  for  illegal  dress." 
But  he  persistently  maintained  that  his  waistcoat 
was  near  enough  "  white  "  to  comply  with  the  rule, 
and  after  repeated  efforts  to  swerve  him,  the  board 
finally  dropped  the  matter. 

In  later  years  his  Harvard  friends  recalled  him  as 
a  fellow  "of  buoyant  spirits  and  refreshing  social 
ity,  sensitive  and  considerate,  and  always  ready  to 
take  people  at  their  best."  He  was  an  enthusiastic 
member  of  the  Hasty  Pudding  Club,  and  retained  a 
friendly  interest  in  it  even  after  he  became  senator. 
During  his  senior  year,  he  and  eight  of  his  intimates 
in  the  class  formed  a  secret  society  called  ' '  The 
Nine."  Its  meetings  were  held  at  the  rooms  of  the 


PARENTAGE  AND  YOUTH  29 

members,  who  in  turn  presented  essays  and  other 
literary  exercises  for  mutual  criticism. 

At  the  end  of  his  junior  year,  with  four  of  his 
classmates  he  set  out  upon  a  tramping  trip  to  Lake 
Champlain.  They  left  Cambridge  in  fine  fettle  one 
afternoon  in  the  middle  of  July.  At  Amherst  they 
found  the  college  still  in  session ;  they  attended 
evening  prayers  and  at  five  o'clock  the  next  morn 
ing  the  college  bell  again  called  them  to  chapel. 
Striking  to  the  north,  they  visited  Bennington,  for, 
as  Suuiuer  phrased  it,  "  We  came  to  visit  a  spot  hal 
lowed  in  American  history, — and  to  tread  that  field, 
sacred  to  liberty,  where  the  cause  of  the  Colonies 
first  began  to  brighten. "  Upon  the  ground  they 
studied  the  positions  of  the  American  and  British 
forces.  The  pilgrims  then  passed  on  to  Whitehall, 
Ticouderoga  and  Saratoga.  At  West  Point  Sunnier 
presented  to  the  superintendent  a  letter  from  his 
father,  introducing  this  youth  who  a  few  years  be 
fore  had  preferred  the  Military  Academy  to  Harvard 
College.  His  point  of  view  had  already  changed, 
for  while  he  was  making  a  pilgrimage  of  famous 
battle-fields,  and  here  marveled  at  the  perfection  of 
the  cadets'  drill,  he  acknowledged  that  his  enthusi 
asm  was  now  "for  the  mild  arts  of  peace." 

This  episode  in  Sumner's  student  days  is  of  no 
slight  significance  as  an  earnest  of  his  future.  He 
entered  upon  the  trip  with  a  zest  which  did  not  flag 
to  the  end  ;  to  the  various  historic  scenes  he  brought 
a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  events  with  which  they 
were  associated  and  a  kindling  imagination  that 


30  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

thrilled  him  with  patriotic  fervor.  One  and  another 
of  his  companions  dropped  away  ;  he  alone  clung  to 
the  plan  as  originally  made,  and  by  himself  ascended 
Mt.  Defiance  and  hunted  out  the  scenes  of  Burgoyne's 
retreat  and  surrender.  He  was  everywhere  a  keen 
observer  ;  industrial  methods  and  opportunities,  par 
ticularly  the  advantages  of  the  great  canals,  im 
pressed  him.  He  was  in  fine  physical  [vigor  :  the 
heat  of  summer,  the  chances  and  changes  of  farm 
house  hospitality  had  no  terrors  for  him.  In  a 
single  day  he  tramped  alone  thirty-seven  miles. 
This  tour  was  a  prelude  and  a  preparation  for  those 
extended  and  broadening  European  travels  of  a  few 
years  later  which  were  to  contribute  most  essentially, 
though  unexpectedly,  to  his  equipment  for  the  noble 
public  service  that  lay  before  him. 


CHAPTER  II 

CHOICE  OF  A   PROFESSION 

AT  the  age  of  nineteen  Charles  Sumuer  was  grad 
uated  from  Harvard.  He  had  been  a  diligent 
student  and  his  iniiid  was  well  stored  ;  he  had  a  high 
sense  of  duty  and  an  ambition  for  service,  yet  he  felt 
no  distinct  leading  toward  any  particular  profession. 
Since  u  chill  penury  "  did  not  force  him  at  once  to 
become  a  bread-winner,  he  remained  at  home  and 
devoted  himself  to  study,  while  he  wrestled  with  the 
problem  of  choosing  a  vocation.  During  this  year 
of  self- analysis  he  took  life  seriously  :  he  laid  out  for 
himself  an  exacting  schedule  of  work,  and  held  to  it, 
rising  soon  after  five  and  rarely  retiring  before  mid 
night.  Both  society  and  needed  exercise  were  neg 
lected.  His  home  was  a  discouraging  environment 
for  scholarly  work,  for  he  had  no  other  study  than 
the  common  sitting-room  of  the  whole  family,  with 
irs  nine  children.  Nevertheless,  he  read  diligently  : 
samples  of  his  self-prescribed  regimen  were  Tacitus, 
Juvenal  and  Persius,  Shakespeare,  Milton,  Hume's 
"  Essays  "  ;  and  in  history,  Hallam,  Robertson  and 
Roscoe.  What  greatly  impressed  his  classmates 
was  the  grim  resolution  with  which  he  now  set  about 
conquering  his  college  bete  noire,  mathematics,  in 
the  conviction  that  his  mental  discipline  had  suffered 
from  his  neglect  of  that  line  of  study.  Four  hours 


32  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

of  each  forenoon  he  devoted  to  this  rigorous  task. 
He  found  that  he  "  really  got  geometry  with  some 
pleasure, "  but  confessed  that  after  much  "digging 
among  the  roots  of  algebra,  those  roots,  when  found, 
are  but  bitter  "  ;  he  stuck  to  them  for  four  months, 
however,  until  he  had  retrieved  his  college  delin 
quencies. 

As  a  part  of  his  self-culture  Sumner  seized  every 
opportunity  to  hear  great  orators.  He  went  to 
Salem  to  listen  to  Webster's  famous  appeal  in  the 
White  murder  trial,  and  heard  several  of  the  states 
man's  most  celebrated  speeches.  The  first  meeting 
of  these  two,  whose  careers  were  to  be  so  closely 
linked,  was  significant.  i '  The  Boston  Society  for 
the  Diffusion  of  Useful  Knowledge ' '  offered  a  prize 
for  the  best  essay,  written  by  a  minor,  on  commerce. 
On  the  evening  appointed  for  the  announcement  of 
the  result,  before  a  great  audience,  Daniel  Webster, 
the  president  of  the  society,  opened  the  envelope 
which  had  accompanied  the  successful  essay,  and 
requested  the  winner,  "  Charles  Sumner,"  to  come 
forward.  As  the  slender  boy  of  twenty  with  intelli 
gent  face  and  shock  of  curling  brown  hair  stepped 
upon  the  platform,  America's  most  distinguished 
statesman  shook  his  hand  cordially,  called  him  his 
"  young  friend,"  and  added,  with  other  kindly 
words,  that  "  the  public  held  a  pledge  of  this  young 
man." 

But  Sumner  found  it  no  easy  task  to  determine 
how  he  should  set  about  redeeming  that  pledge. 
He  was  bitterly  unhappy  at  home,  for  he  was  mor- 


CHOICE  OF  A  PROFESSION  33 

bidly  sensitive  at  being  still  dependent  upon  his 
father.  To  a  classmate  he  wrote  :  "  I  am  grateful 
for  the  encouraging  word  you  give  me.  I  am  rather 
despondent,  and  I  meet  from  none  of  my  family  those 
vivifying  expressions  which  a  young  man  always 
heartily  accepts.  My  father  says  nought  by  way  of 
encouragement.  He  seems  determined  to  let  me 
shape  my  own  course,  so  that  if  I  am  wise,  I  shall 
be  wise  for  myself  ;  and  if  I  am  foolish,  I  alone  shall 
bear  it."  Chance  threw  in  his  way  an  opportunity 
to  try  his  hand  at  teaching  ;  he  filled  a  temporary 
vacancy  in  a  private  school  where  one  of  his  friends 
was  employed.  Three  weeks  sufficed  to  convince 
him  that  he  had  "a  natural  aversion  to  keeping 
school."  "  And  oh  ! — quorum  magna  parsfui — the 
harassing,  throat-cutting,  mind-dissolving  duties : 
pounding  knowledge  into  heads  which  have  no  ap 
petency  for  it,  and  enduring  the  arguing  of  urchin 
boys,  and  all  those  other  ills  to  which  schoolmaster 
flesh  is  heir  !" 

For  a  time  he  plunged  into  current  politics  and 
became  quite  a  propagandist  of  the  anti-Masonic 
movement,  "pricked  on  by  the  wrongs  done  his 
father  by  the  Masons  "  ;  but  in  later  years  he  ac 
knowledged  that  this  movement  had  assumed  undue 
prominence  in  his  inexperienced  eyes.  Gradually 
he "brought  his  resolution  to  a  focus"  :  his  life-work 
should  be  in  the  law.  Yet  the  decision  was  made 
without  conviction  or  enthusiasm.  To  a  friend 
already  engaged  in  legal  studies,  he  had  recently 
written  :  u  I  fear  that  Blackstone  and  his  train  will 


34  CHARLES  SUMNEK 

usurp  your  mind  too  much,  to  the  exclusion  of  all 
cultivation  of  polite  letters.  ...  I  look  upon 
the  mere  lawyer,  a  reader  of  cases  and  cases  alone, 
as  one  of  the  veriest  wretches  in  the  world.  Dry 
items  and  facts,  argumentative  reports,  and  details 
of  pleadings  must  iucrust  the  mind  with  somewhat 
of  their  own  rust." 

But  a  few  weeks  wrought  a  startling  transforma 
tion.  For  a  year  Suinner  had  been  wrestling  with 
the  problem  of  his  future ;  when  once  the  decision 
was  made  that  he  should  study  law,  hesitation  and 
morbid  introspection  were  at  an  end.  Where  his 
studies  should  be  pursued  was  not  a  matter  of  ques 
tion.  The  whole  bent  of  his  mind  was  toward  a 
systematic  study  of  principles :  not  the  lawyer's 
office,  but  the  university  was  the  congenial  field  for 
his  labor,  and  to  the  Harvard  Law  School  he  turned, 
drawn  both  by  his  love  for  his  alma  mater  and  by 
his  devotion  to  Judge  Story,  his  father's  warm 
friend  from  the  days  when  they  were  students 
together  at  college. 

Only  forty  pupils  were  then  in  attendance  upon 
the  newly  established  law  school.  In  so  small  a 
group  the  men  were  brought  into  close  associa 
tion,  and  here — to  cite  a  single  illustration — began 
Sumner's  intimacy  with  Wendell  Phillips.  But  the 
chief  advantage  in  the  smallness  of  the  numbers  lay 
in  the  educational  opportunities  which  it  afforded. 
Class  exercises  were  not  formal  lectures,  but  rather 
conferences  to  which  both  the  teacher  and  his  little 
circle  of  pupils  contributed.  During  these  years 


CHOICE  OF  A  PKOFESSION  35 

there  were  but  two  professorships,  and  these  were 
held  during  most  of  Sumuer's  course  by  Joseph 
Story  aud  Simon  Greenleaf.  With  both  of  these 
eminent  jurists  Suinner  was  soon  upon  terms  of  the 
closest  intimacy,  and  it  would  be  difficult  to  over 
estimate  the  influence  of  these  friendships.  Judge 
Story  came  to  love  him  as  a  son,  receiving  him  in 
his  home  as  a  member  of  the  family.  This  affection 
was  fully  reciprocated.  His  teacher's  beautiful 
character,  his  immense  learning,  his  eloquence,  his 
well-earned  fame  as  judge  and  publicist,  all  appealed 
to  the  ardent  disciple  and  kindled  in  him  intense 
enthusiasm.  The  ideal,  which  through  anxious 
months  had  been  eluding  his  quest,  now  stood  re 
vealed  in  the  Jurist,  and  Suinner  eagerly  "  folio  wed 
after,  if  that  he  might  apprehend." 

Indeed,  to  his  friends  it  soon  became  a  matter  of 
anxiety  lest  he  be  consumed  by  his  own  zeal.  At 
twenty  he  was  described  as  a  "  great,  tall,  lank 
creature,  quite  heedless  of  the  form  and  fashion  of 
his  garb."  Though  now  six  feet  and  two  inches  in 
height,  he  weighed  but  120  pounds  ;  his  complexion 
was  not  healthy,  his  eyes  were  inflamed  by  much 
study,  and  he  developed  a  cough  which  caused 
groundless  apprehensions,  for  he  was  endowed 
with  a  splendid  constitution.  The  passionate  fervor 
of  the  devotee  he  brought  to  the  pursuit  of  his 
"  noble  profession,"  sacrificing  alike  recreation  and 
social  engagements.  "I  wish  no  acquaintances, 
for  they  eat  up  time  like  locusts."  He  declared  that 
the  lawyer  if  he  were  to  be  anything  but  a  mere 


36  CHAELES  SUMN&B 

pettifogger,  must  know  law,  history,  philosophy, 
aiid  human  nature.  This  is  his  schedule  of  work  : 
"  Six  hours, — namely,  the  forenoon  wholly  and  solely 
to  law ;  afternoon  to  classics  ;  evening  to  history, 
subjects  collateral  and  assistant  to  law,  etc."  Two 
o'clock  was  his  regular  hour  for  retiring,  and  he 
was  often  up  with  the  sun.  Such  unremitting  labor 
early  began  to  yield  fruit.  Judge  Story  said  : 
"He  has  a  wonderful  memory,  he  keeps  all  his 
knowledge  in  order  and  can  put  his  hand  on  it  in  a 
moment.  This  is  a  great  gift."  Yet  some  of  his 
friends  questioned  whether  in  keeping  his  mind 
constantly  on  the  stretch  in  the  effort  of  acquiring 
knowledge  he  were  not  impairing  its  power  for 
higher,  creative  effort. 

He  was  made  librarian,  a  task  which  he  found 
thoroughly  congenial.  He  catalogued  the  collection, 
and  no  one  approached  him  in  knowledge  of  its 
treasures.  In  later  years  he  was  remembered  as  a 
"slender,  bright-eyed  youth,  with  what  seems  to  me 
an  adoring  reverence  for  the  hallowed  spot,  so  that  his 
voice  was  subdued  and  his  touch  rested  tenderly  on 
the  dear  books."  Yet  aside  from  his  regular  tasks, 
Sumner  found  time  to  get  some  valuable  experience 
in  writing.  He  won  another  Bowdoin  prize  by  a 
rather  diffuse  and  hastily  written  paper.  Soon,  how 
ever,  u  his  pen  grew  stiffer  "  as  a  result  of  a  series 
of  articles  which  he  contributed  to  the  American 
Jurist.  But  as  yet  his  writing  showed  little  of  the 
vigor  and  vividness  which  were  to  be  called  forth 
by  the  great  issues  of  later  years. 


CHOICE  OF  A  PROFESSION  37 

William  Wetiuore  Story,  the  celebrated  sculptor, 
who  kiiew  and  loved  Sunnier  as  an  elder  brother, 
has  left  the  best  picture  of  the  young  law  student. 
He  describes  him  as  an  eager  and  indefatigable 
worker,  who  had  not  limited  his  studies  to  the  law, 
but  had  ranged  with  keen  interest  over  the  whole 
field  of  literature.  "He  was  at  this  time  totally 
without  vanity,  and  desirous  to  acquire  knowledge 
and  information  on  every  subject."  "Of  all  the 
men  I  ever  knew  at  his  age,  he  was  the  least  sus 
ceptible  to  the  charms  of  women.  He  would  desert 
the  most  blooming  beauty  to  talk  to  the  plainest  of 
men.  This  was  a  constant  source  of  amusement  to 
us,  and  we  used  to  lay  wagers  with  pretty  girls  that 
with  all  their  art  they  could  not  keep  him  at  their 
side  a  quarter  of  an  hour, ' '  and  the  girls  always  lost 
their  wagers.  "He  was  an  interesting  talker,  but 
had  no  lightness  of  hand.  He  was  kindly  of  nature, 
interested  in  everything.  He  was  at  this  time 
almost  impervious  to  a  joke.  He  had  no  humor 
himself,  and  little  sense  of  it  in  others,  and  his  jests, 
when  he  tried  to  make  one,  were  rather  cumbrous. 
But  in  l  plain  sailing >  no  one  could  be  better  or 
more  agreeable." 

At  the  conclusion  of  his  courses  in  the  law  school, 
early  in  January,  1834,  Sumner,  as  a  student,  en 
tered  the  office  of  Benjamin  Band,  a  lawyer  of 
eminence,  in  whose  conversation  and  choice  legal 
library  the  young  man  found  his  chief  stimulus. 
He  continued  making  frequent  contributions  to  the 
American  Jurist. 


38  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

But  travel  was  ever  one  of  the  most  educative 
factors  in  Sumner' s  development,  and  be  could  not 
bring  himself  to  settle  down  to  the  drudgery  of  a 
law  office  before  taking  a  trip  to  Washington,  his 
main  object  being  to  attend  sessions  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  where  his  ideal  and  mentor,  Judge  Story, 
was  sitting.  To  the  young  man  of  twenty-three  it 
was  a  most  memorable  experience.  Leaving  Boston 
at  half-past  three  o'clock  on  a  February  morning, 
1834,  by  hard  labor  over  the  worst  of  roads,  in  cold 
so  intense  that  but  for  his  sister's  "  tippet "  he  de 
clared  he  should  have  frozen,  he  reached  Hartford 
at  three  o'clock  the  following  morning.  Before 
noon  he  was  off  again,  and  in  nine  hours  the  forty- 
mile  ride  to  New  Haven  was  accomplished.  His 
attending  morning  prayers  at  Yale  College  almost 
made  him  lose  the  seven  o'clock  boat  for  New  York. 
From  here  to  Philadelphia  the  trip  was  by  boat  ex 
cept  for  the  thirty-seven  miles  from  Arnboy  to 
Bordentown,  where  Sumner  experienced  his  first 
railway  ride.  To  his  fourteen-year-old  sister  he 
wrote  :  *  *  There  is  something  partaking  of  the  sub 
lime  in  the  sense  that  you  are  going  at  the  rate  of 
fifteen  miles  an  hour,  drawn  by  an  invisible  agent, 
the  contrivance  of  man,  who  has  sought  out  many 
inventions." 

In  New  York  he  received  a  cordial  welcome  from 
Chancellor  Kent,  to  whom  he  brought  a  letter  of 
introduction  from  Professor  Greeuleaf.  He  told 
Sumner  that  he  "wanted  to  go  to  Washington,  but 
if  he  went  should  be  obliged  to  see  much  company, 


CHOICE  OF  A  PEOFESSION  39 

call  upon  Jackson,  and  dine  with  him  perhaps,  all 
of  which  he  could  not  consent  to  do."  He  believed 
that  "Jackson  would  ruin  us."  (A  few  weeks 
later  Simmer  was  referring  to  Jackson  as  "the  old 
tyrant.";  He  described  Kent's  conversation  as 
"lively  and  instructive,  but  grossly  uugrammatical. 
It  is  a  wonder  which  I  cannot  solve,  that  he  is  so 
correct  a  writer,  and  so  incorrect  a  converser." 

At  Philadelphia  he  formed  a  friendship,  lasting 
and  helpful,  with  Eichard  Peters,  the  reporter  of 
decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court.  In  Washington 
Judge  Story's  influence  opened  to  him  the  rarest  of 
opportunities.  All  but  one  of  the  justices  of  the 
Supreme  Court  were  living  in  the  same  house  and 
taking  their  meals  at  the  same  table,  and  here  it 
was  young  Sumner's  privilege  to  be  admitted  to 
their  goodly  fellowship.  Chief- Justice  Marshall 
seemed  to  him  "a  model  of  simplicity  ;  naturally 
taciturn,  yet  ready  to  laugh  ;  to  joke  and  to  be 
joked  with."  Sunnier  spent  a  month  in  Washing 
ton.  His  chief  interest  was  in  the  Supreme  Court, 
where  one  of  the  most  important  cases  was  being 
tried,  with  Francis  Scott  Key  and  Daniel  Webster 
as  opponents,  both  of  whom  seemed  to  the  youthful 
critic  scandalously  remiss  in  their  preparation. 
Webster  gave  him  a  card  entitling  him  to  admission 
to  the  floor  of  the  Senate,  and  here  he  heard  each 
of  the  great  triumvirate.  Clay's  eloquence  he 
thought  "splendid  and  thrilling."  "  His  language, 
without  being  choice^  is  strong  ;  but  it  is  his  manner 
.  .  .  which  makes  him  so  powerful."  Calhoun 


40  CHARLES  SUMNER 

11  is  no  orator,  very  rugged  in  his  language,  unstudied 
in  style,  marching  directly  to  the  main  points  of  his 
subject  without  stopping  for  parley  or  introduc 
tion."  Sumuer  found  his  father's  benefactor,  Gov 
ernor  Lincoln,  who  was  just  beginning  a  first  term 
in  Congress,  homesick  and  much  discouraged  by  the 
size  of  the  Representatives'  Hall,  where  he  could 
neither  hear  nor  be  heard.  Sumner  wrote  long  ac 
counts  of  his  experiences  both  to  Professor  Green- 
leaf  and  to  his  father,  to  whom  he  had  to  apply 
repeatedly  for  funds  to  meet  his  expenses  of  about 
ten  dollars  a  week.  These  letters  were  signed  : 
"  Affectionately,  your  prodigal,  Chas." 

Despite  the  wealth  of  opportunities  which  Wash 
ington  offered  to  an  impressionable  young  man,  it 
made  little  appeal  to  Sumner.  His  first  feeling  was 
one  of  disappointment.  i  *  Here  I  am  in  the  great 
city,  or  rather  the  city  of  great  design,  of  spacious 
and  far-reaching  streets,  without  houses  to  adorn 
them  or  business  to  keep  them  lively,  with  a  Capitol 
that  would  look  proud  amidst  European  palaces, 
and  with  whole  lines  of  poor,  stunted  brick  houses, 
with  stores  beneath  and  boarding  above.  There  is 
nothing  natural  in  the  growth  of  the  city.  It  only 
grows  under  the  hotbed  culture  of  Congress." 
Nor  was  the  political  and  social  atmosphere  more 
congenial  to  him  :  "  Notwithstanding  the  attraction 
afforded  by  the  Senate,  and  the  newspaper  fame 
which  I  see  the  politicians  there  acquire,  I  feel  no 
envy  therefor,  and  no  disposition  to  enter  the  un- 
weeded  garden  in  which  they  are  laboring,  even  if 


CHOICE  OF  A  PROFESSION  41 

its  gates  were  open  to  me  ;  in  plain  language,  I  see 
no  political  condition  that  I  should  be  willing  to  de 
sire,  even  if  I  thought  it  within  my  reach, — which, 
indeed,  I  do  not  think  of  the  humblest."  On  the 
eve  of  leaving  Washington,  he  wrote  to  his  father  : 
"  I  shall  probably  never  come  here  again.  I  have 
little  or  no  desire  ever  to  come  again  in  any  capacity. 
Nothing  that  I  have  seen  of  politics  has  made  me 
look  upon  them  with  any  feeling  other  than  loath 
ing.  The  more  I  see  of  them,  the  more  I  love  law, 
which,  I  feel,  will  give  me  an  honorable  liveli 
hood.  » 

Not  long  after  Suruner's  return  from  this  orient 
ing  journey,  Judge  Story  urged  him  to  accept  an 
iustructorship  in  the  Harvard  Law  School.  Both 
of  his  old  professors  had  looked  forward  to  this  as 
sociation,  for  success  in  which  Suinner  seemed  well 
fitted  both  by  nature  and  by  training.  But  he  was 
now  eager  to  get  into  the  active  practice  of  his  pro 
fession,  and  declined  the  offer.  In  November,  1834, 
he  entered  into  a  partnership  with  George  S.  Hil- 
lard,  whom  he  had  known  years  before  in  the  Latin 
School.  The  young  lawyers  rented  rooms  on  the 
second  floor  at  No.  4  Court  Street,  at  the  corner  of 
Washington  Street,  and  in  that  building  Sumner 
retained  an  office  as  long  as  he  continued  to  prac 
tice  law.  Among  his  neighbors  here  were  men  of 
note  :  Theophilus  Parsons,  Rufus  Choate,  John  A. 
Andrew  and  Horace  Mann.  Professor  Greenleaf 
made  the  new  office  his  headquarters  in  town  ; 
Judge  Story  often  called  upon  his  old  pupils,  and 


42  CHARLES  SUMNER 

soon  their  rooms  came  to  be  a  much  frequented 
rendezvous  for  men  of  legal  and  literary  tastes. 

Sumner's  legal  studies  had  been  most  painstaking 
and  lie  had  a  large  circle  of  influential  friends.  In 
these  early  years  at  the  bar  he  met  with  moderate 
success  ;  but  it  was  far  below  what  his  friends  had 
expected,  and  he  acknowledged  his  own  disappoint 
ment.  Some  of  the  reasons  were  not  far  to  seek. 
He  had  little  liking  for  the  business  routine  of  the 
lawyer's  office.  His  interest  was  in  legal  principles 
rather  than  in  practice  ;  his  mind  suited  better  the 
vocation  of  the  teacher  or  judge  than  of  the  attorney. 
In  court  he  was  apt  to  display  ponderous  learning 
rather  than  dexterous  marshaling  of  testimony.  An 
other  cause  which  tended  to  impair  his  success  was 
the  irregularity  of  his  office  hours.  For,  early  in 
1835,  he  had  begun  to  lecture  in  the  law  school,  in 
the  absence  of  Judge  Story,  and  for  the  next  two 
years  he  continued  this  work,  which  often  kept  him 
away  from  his  office  every  other  day  for  mouths. 
This  teaching  proved  far  more  congenial  than  that 
of  his  earlier  days.  His  pupils  remembered  him  as 
assuming  no  professional  airs,  but  having  a  warm 
sympathy  and  fellowship  with  the  boys.  "  He  was 
very  good-tempered  and  fond  of  youngsters, — at  all 
events  as  listeners."  William  Wetmore  Story  was 
his  favorite  pupil,  an  intimacy  which  gave  great 
satisfaction  to  Judge  Story.  He  assisted  both  Story 
and  Greenleaf  in  preparing  some  of  their  legal  texts 
for  the  press.  For  three  years  he  contributed  fre 
quently  to  the  American  Jurist ;  in  the  spring  of  1836 


CHOICE  OF  A  PBOFESSION  43 

its  editors  were  announced  as  Hillard,  Sumner  and 
Cashing,  the  author  of  works  on  parliamentary  law, 
a  young  man  with  whom  Sumner  had  hired  a  lodg 
ing-room  in  the  same  building  with  his  office.  This 
editorial  work  was  of  good  quality,  but  it  took  much 
time  and  brought  little  revenue.  Sumner' s  articles 
usually  dealt  with  legal  writers  and  books  rather 
than  with  the  law  itself,  thus  further  evidencing  a 
bent  of  mind  little  suited  to  active  legal  duties. 
Another  important  task  which  Sumner  undertook 
was  the  revising  and  completing  of  Dunlap's  "Ad 
miralty  Practice."  His  careful  study  of  this  sub 
ject  was  of  great  service  in  his  public  life.  In  later 
years  Sumner  came  to  think  that  he  had  allowed 
himself  to  undertake  altogether  too  much  literary 
drudgery  in  these  early  days  of  his  law  practice. 
The  surprising  thing  is  that  while  his  friends  and 
associates  were  winning  distinction  as  public  speak 
ers,  and  accepting  public  office,  he  showed  no  liking 
or  special  aptitude  for  the  platform  and  found  no 
attraction  whatever  in  politics. 

But  the  thing  of  most  significance  at  this  period 
of  Sumner' s  life  was  not  his  slow  rise  in  his  profes 
sion,  but  his  widening  friendship  among  men  of 
force  and  distinction.  In  Washington  he  had  first 
made  the  acquaintance  of  Francis  Lieber,  the  pub 
licist,  with  whom  he  was  to  enjoy  many  years  of 
close  and  helpful  intimacy.  At  this  period,  also, 
he  came  into  friendly  intercourse  with  the  Rev.  Dr. 
William  Ellery  Chauniug,  by  whom  his  ideals  and 
view  of  life  were  profoundly  affected.  His  editorial 


44  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

work  brought  him  in  touch  with  eminent  jurists,  at 
home  and  abroad.  Most  stimulating  and  helpful  of 
all,  however,  was  the  warm  friendship  which  was 
formed  among  five  young  men  of  ages  ranging  from 
twenty-six  to  thirty, — Cornelius  C.  Felton,  Henry 
E.  Cleveland,  Henry  W.  Longfellow,  George  S. 
Hillard,  and  Charles  Surnner.  They  came  together 
informally  several  times  a  month,  to  talk  over  com 
mon  interests  and  aspirations.  Two  of  the  number 
v  had  already  visited  Europe,  and  the  others  were 
Milled  with  a  keen  Wanderlust.  They  were  all  book- 
lovers,  and  had  made  considerable  advances  in  var 
ious  lines  of  literary  effort.  Good  cheer  abounded 
at  their  meetings,  and  in  its  warmth  they  talked 
over  current  books  and  criticized  one  another's  liter 
ary  ventures  with  the  utmost  frankness  and  good 
will.  The  gatherings  of  "The  Five  of  Clubs,"  as 
they  called  themselves,  continued  for  a  number  of 
years. 


CHAPTEE  III 

EUROPEAN   TRAVEL 

FOR  years  one  of  Sumner' s  keenest  desires  had 
been  to  know  Europe,  and  in  1837  this  desire,  un 
der  the  influence  of  Cleveland  and  Longfellow,  be 
came  a  fixed  resolve.  The  decision  to  break  away 
from  the  law  office  for  an  indefinite  sojourn  abroad 
was  one  not  lightly  to  be  made.  The  counsels  of 
prudence  and  of  most  of  his  friends  were  distinctly 
against  it.  Sumner  was  now  twenty-six  years  of 
age.  He  had  disappointed  his  friends  as  well  as 
himself  by  his  failure  to  gain  an  assured  start  in  his 
profession,  and  the  plainest  dictate  of  common  sense 
seemed  to  be  that  the  building  up  of  his  practice 
should  receive  his  unremitting  attention.  Moreover, 
he  had  not  been  able  to  save  more  than  a  third  of 
what  his  contemplated  tour  would  cost,  and  must 
therefore  borrow  three  or  four  thousand  dollars,  a 
sum  likely  to  mortgage  his  earnings  for  several 
years.  Not  only  did  his  friends  think  his  plan  un 
wise  because  of  its  expense  and  its  interruption  of 
his  legal  career,  but  they  feared  that  its  effect  would 
be  to  dissipate  his  energies,  wean  him  from  his  pro 
fession,  and  make  him  discontented  with  the  plod 
ding  life  that  lay  before  him.  Sumner  was  sensitive 
to  this  disapproval,  and  was  not  a  little  disheartened 


46  CHAKLES  SUMNEE 

by  President  Quincy's  blunt  words,  u  All  that  Eu 
rope  will  do  for  him  will  be  to  spoil  him,  sending 
him  home  with  a  moustache  and  a  cane." 

In  the  face  of  these  discouragements,  it  required 
not  a  little  resolution  on  Sunnier' s  part  to  hold  to 
his  purpose.  But  it  was  no  holiday  trip  for  amuse 
ment  or  recreation  that  he  was  planning.  "My 
journey,"  he  wrote  to  a  friend,  "will  not  be  pecul 
iarly  legal.  I  shall  aim  to  see  society  in  all  its  forms 
which  are  accessible  to  me  j  to  see  men  of  all  char 
acters  ;  to  observe  institutions  and  laws ;  to  go  cir 
cuits  and  attend  terms  and  parliaments  ;  and  then 
come  home  and  be  happy."  And  so,  arranging  to 
borrow  from  Judge  Story  and  two  other  friends  the 
funds  needed,  on  the  8th  of  December,  1837,  he 
embarked  for  travel  and  sojourn  in  Europe  which 
were  to  last  nearly  two  and  a  half  years.  The  voy 
age  was  made  in  the  sailing-ship  Albany,  for  as 
yet  no  steamship  crossed  the  Atlantic  in  passenger 
service.1 

Humboldt  used  to  say:  "You  never  see  in  a 
country  what  you  do  not  take  with  you."  Earely 
has  a  young  man  gone  from  America  to  Europe  so 
tingling  with  anticipation,  so  susceptible  to  all  that 
is  best  in  the  society,  art  and  culture  of  the  Old 

JTo  the  account  of  this  journey  and  to  Sumner's  letters 
from  abroad,  his  friend  and  the  authorized  compiler  of  his 
memoirs,  E.  L.  Pierce,  gives  a  sixth  of  the  total  space  devoted 
to  his  life.  This  is  certainly  a  disproportionate  allotment  ;  yet 
it  is  true  that  this  European  experience  constituted  a  turning- 
point  in  his  life.  It  formed  his  mind  and  hia  associations,  and 
proved  a  most  essential  part  of  his  preparation  for  his  as  yet  un 
suspected  life-work. 


EUROPEAN  TRAVEL  47 

World.  From  his  first  sight  of  Havre;  his  letters 
are  full  of  the  zest  of  novelty.  He  put  in  a  day  of 
strenuous  sightseeing  at  Rouen,  fascinated  by  the 
quaint  architecture  and  the  historical  associations 
of  its  cathedral  and  other  buildings,  and  declared 
that  he  could  spend  months  in  that  city  and  still 
find  interest.  Yet  in  the  next  breath  this  eager 
student  of  " society  in  all  its  forms"  says  that  he 
must  leave  Rouen  after  a  stay  of  only  thirty-six 
hours,  for  "  to-morrow  night  is  the  last  on  which 
the  hells  of  Paris  are  to  be  open,  they  being  abol 
ished  after  that  time  by  law  ;  and  I  wish,  if  possi 
ble,  to  see  them,  besides  being  in  Paris  on  New 
Year's  Day."  Arrived  in  Paris  on  the  evening  of 
Sunday,  December  31st,  his  first  object  of  search 
was  the  most  famous  of  these  gaming-houses.  He 
has  left  a  vivid  account  of  this  "last  night  of  Fras- 
cati,  and  my  first  night  in  Paris,"  discoursing 
gravely  on  the  excitements  of  gambling,  and  ac 
knowledging  that  he  "felt  the  temptation,  though 
he  restrained  his  hand." 

He  remained  in  Paris  till  the  end  of  May,  two 
months  longer  than  he  had  intended.  At  first  he 
took  lodgings  in  the  Latin  Quarter  and  renounced 
everything  that  could  interfere  with  his  getting  com 
mand  of  French.  He  employed  two  teachers,  and 
went  for  long  walks  with  his  landlady's  small  boy, 
"taking  every  opportunity  to  speak  the  language, 
even  if  it  be  but  a  word."  He  became  a  subscriber 
at  Galignani's  reading  room,  where  he  read  ten 
newspapers  a  day.  Such  persistent  study  soon  be- 


48  CHARLES  SUMMER 

gan  to  yield  good  returns :  within  four  weeks  he 
was  following  lectures  at  the  Sorbonne  ;  a  few  weeks 
later  he  began  to  go  into  society  and  within  three 
months  he  served  as  interpreter  for  an  American 
before  a  magistrate. 

His  days  were  crowded  full.  All  was  fish  that 
came  to  his  net.  At  the  Sorbonne  and  the  College 
de  France  he  passed  from  room  to  room,  sampling 
the  lectures  and  testing  his  knowledge  of  French. 
His  programme  of  a  single  morning  will  illustrate 
the  variety  of  his  intellectual  diet :  First,  at  the 
Sorbonne,  a  lecture  on  the  differential  and  integral 
calculus, — which  must  have  been  particularly  edi 
fying,  in  view  of  Sumner's  mathematical  aptitudes ; 
next,  a  lecture  on  Servitudes  in  the  ficole  de  Droit ; 
next,  at  the  Sorbonne,  a  part  of  a  lecture  ' '  on  some 
French  author, — I  could  not  catch  the  name  "  ;  next, 
at  the  l^cole  de  Droit,  a  lecture  on  the  Institutes; 
next,  a  visit  to  the  Musee  d' Artillerie.  At  the  end 
of  three  months  he  had  heard  almost  all  the  lecturers 
of  eminence.  He  had  also  made  a  thorough  study 
of  the  courts  and  of  court  procedure.  The  sessions 
of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  and  of  the  House  of 
Peers  interested  him  greatly,  and  he  records  impres 
sions  of  Guizot,  Thiers,  Lamartine,  and  others, 
with  whom  he  became  somewhat  acquainted.  He 
formed  a  high  opinion  of  Louis  Philippe, — "a great 
sovereign,  truly  great ;  mingling  in  business  as  much 
as  his  ministers,  and  controlling  them  all.  He  is 
more  than  his  cabinet.  Measures  emanate  from 
him.  With  skill  that  is  wonderful,  he  has  reined 


EUROPEAN  TRAVEL  49 

in  the  revolution  of  July."  Teu  years  later  the 
King  was  to  reveal  himself  in  another  light. 

But  Simmer's  purpose  had  been  not  to  study 
governmental  or  legal  institutions  alone  ;  it  was 
to  see  society  in  all  its  forms.  Hence  he  visited  not 
only  the  ordinary  objects  of  tourists'  interest,  but 
also  the  observatory,  the  famous  hospitals,  where  he 
attended  the  clinics  of  the  most  eminent  surgeons, 
and  the  Hopital  Salpetriere,  the  great  almshouse 
where  were  lodged  5,000  infirm  and  aged  women. 
He  delighted  in  the  city's  architectural  beauties, 
and  was  captivated  by  its  street  scenes  and  life.  At 
midnight  of  Mardi  Gras  he  went  to  the  masked  ball 
at  the  French  Opera,  and  at  daybreak  drove  out  to 
Courtille,  a  village  beyond  the  walls,  where  the  merry 
making  of  the  common  people  was  still  at  its  height. 

In  March  Sumner  changed  his  lodgings  from  the 
Latin  Quarter  to  the  region  of  the  boulevards.  As 
siduous  study  had  loosed  his  tongue,  and  he  now 
began  to  go  more  into  society.  He  presented  few 
of  the  many  letters  friends  had  plentifully  provided 
him.  The  editor,  Foelix,  showed  him  much  kind 
ness,  and  he  had  a  friendly  interview  with  Sis- 
mondi.  Into  general  society  he  went  but  little.  It 
is  significant  of  the  extent  of  French  knowledge  of 
America  at  that  time,  that  at  the  table  of  M.  6rard, 
then  perhaps  the  most  eminent  manufacturer  of 
musical  instruments  in  the  world,  Sumner  was  asked 
by  his  host,  with  the  greatest  ingenuousness,  "if 
one  of  the  noblest  and  most  respectable  families  in 
America  were  not  the  descendants  of  Montezuma." 


50  CHARLES  SUMNEE 

The  young  student  of  jurisprudence  was  not 
favorably  impressed  by  the  learning  of  the  French 
bar :  "  With  them  now  it  is  indeed  the  code  and 
nothing  but  the  code,  .  .  .  and  it  would  seem 
superfluous  to  add  that  they  know  nothing  of  for 
eign  jurisprudence,  nothing  of  English  and  Ameri 
can  in  particular." 

Amid  the  art  treasures  of  the  Louvre  and  of  Ver 
sailles  Sumuer  felt  "cabined,  cribbed,  confined 
from  my  ignorance  of  the  principles  of  art  and  of 
its  history,  except  in  its  most  prominent  traits : 
but  they  touched  my  mind,  untutored  as 
it  is,  like  a  sweet  strain  of  music."  His  artistic 
appreciation  was  much  quickened  during  these 
months.  The  art  of  the  theatre  and  of  the  opera 
was  highly  congenial  to  him,  and  he  was  thrilled 
by  the  genius  of  Mars  and  of  Eachel.  Before  he 
had  been  in  Paris  a  fortnight  he  declared  :  ' l  My 
voyage  has  already  been  compensated  for — seasick 
ness,  time,  money,  and  all — many  times  over.  It 
was  fully  paid  for  at  Eoueu.  All  that  I  have  seen 
since  is  clear  gain."  His  stay  of  five  months  in 
Paris,  though  nearly  twice  as  long  as  he  had  in 
tended,  left  many  things  undone  ;  but  it  had  ac 
complished  its  chief  object  in  giving  him  an  excel 
lent  working  knowledge  of  the  French  language ; 
in  addition  it  had  opened  his  eyes  to  vast  ranges 
of  interest  to  which  he  had  hitherto  been  almost 
totally  blind. 

Sailing  from  Calais  on  the  last  day  of  May, 
Sumner  approached  London  by  the  gate  of  the 


EUROPEAN  TEAYEL  61 

seaj  for  eighty  miles  upon  the  Thames  he  passed 
through  a  continuous  stream  of  vessels,  the  pano 
rama  of  historic  scenes  gradually  opening  before 
his  eager  eyes.  Near  Charing  Cross  he  took  lodg 
ings,  which  he  made  his  headquarters  for  the  next 
ten  mouths. 

The  story  of  this  sojourn  in  England  is  one  of  the 
richest  and  most  varied  opportunity.  Before  he 
left  America,  many  of  his  friends  had  pressed  upon 
him  letters  of  introduction.  These  he  used  most 
sparingly  ;  he  made  it  a  rigid  rule  never  to  ask  for 
an  introduction.  But  he  soon  found  himself  over 
whelmed  by  a  mass  of  invitations.  As  a  foreign 
visitor,  he  was  given  the  entree  of  four  clubs,  the 
Garrick,  Alfred,  Travelers',  and  Athenaeum.  Here 
he  met  on  terms  of  pleasant  familiarity  many  of  the 
leading  men  of  the  day.  Judge  Story's  commenda 
tion  l  to  John  Stuart  Wortley  and  to  Mr.  Justice 
Vaughan,  together  with  Sumner's  intelligent  en 
thusiasm  for  everything  pertaining  to  jurispru 
dence,  brought  him  into  close  association  with  Eng 
land's  most  famous  leaders  of  the  bench  and  of  the 
bar,  who  showed  him  unexampled  cordiality.  He 
was  called  to  a  seat  upon  the  bench  at  Westminster 

JIn  his  letter  introducing  Sumner  to  some  of  the  leading 
jurists  of  England,  Judge  Story  spoke  of  him  as  "a  young 
lawyer  giving  promise  of  the  most  eminent  distinction  in  his 
profession,  with  truly  extraordinary  attainments,  literary  and 
judicial,  and  a  gentleman  of  the  highest  purity  and  propriety 
of  character."  Later  he  was  frequently  heard  to  say  :  <l  I  shall 
die  content,  as  far  as  my  professorship  is  concerned,  if  Charles 
Sumner  is  to  succeed  me." — Carl  Schurz,  Eulogy  of  Sumner,  p. 
187. 


52  CHAELES  SUMNER 

Hall  and  at  the  Old  Bailey,  where  he  was  waited 
upon  by  the  sheriff  and  invited  to  dine  with  the 
judges  and  magistrates.  His  health  was  proposed 
by  the  Lord  Mayor,  and  his  response  was  very  well 
received.  In  the  middle  of  the  summer,  he  left 
London,  and,  on  invitation  of  the  judges,  attended 
the  circuits,  everywhere  meeting  with  the  warmest 
welcome.  He  was  repeatedly  the  guest  of  honor  at 
banquets  to  the  bar  and  court,  and  his  words  of  ap 
preciation  and  of  recognition  of  the  common  heritage 
of  America  and  England  met  with  high  favor.  To 
Story,  Greenleaf,  and  especially  to  Hillard,  he  sent 
long  letters  filled  with  keen  observations  of  English 
legal  institutions  and  with  character  sketches  of  the 
jurists  whom  he  met  upon  this  pilgrimage.  He  was 
struck  forcibly  by  the  contrast  between  the  scanty 
and  shallow  equipment  of  members  of  the  French 
bar  and  the  broad-mindedness  and  profundity  of  his 
English  acquaintances  ;  and  between  the  bickerings 
and  jealousies  among  French  lawyers  in  their  re 
lations  with  one  another  and  the  "  heartiness  and 
cordiality  which  pervade  all  the  English  bar.  They 
are  truly  a  band  of  brothers,  and  I  have  been  re 
ceived  among  them  as  one  of  them.'7  Upon  his  re 
turn  to  London  from  the  tour  of  the  great  circuits, 
one  of  the  chief  objects  of  Simmer's  European  enter 
prise  had  been  accomplished  :  he  had  gained  a 
deeper  insight  into  and  mastery  of  English  legal 
practice  and  circuit  life  than  any  other  foreigner 
who  had  ever  visited  England. 

But  these  invaluable  opportunities  were  not  the 


EUROPEAN  TEAVEL  53 

only  ones  lavished  upon  Sumner,  nor  were  they  the 
ones  that  were  to  exercise  the  greatest  influence 
upon  his  future.  He  was  present  at  the  coronation 
of  Queen  Victoria  ;  he  heard  the  young  Queen's 
speech  at  the  opening  of  Parliament.  By  the  in 
vitation  of  one  of  the  lords-in- waiting,  he  passed  a 
day  and  a  night  at  Windsor  Castle,  and  leaves  some 
highly  unconventional  glimpses  of  the  royal  house 
hold, — as  of  Lord  Byron,  the  poet's  brother,  who, 
having  been  sent  to  take  breakfast  with  the  ladies 
of  the  bedchamber  and  maids  of  honor,  "came 
bouncing  down,  saying,  'Murray,  the  gals  say 
that  there  is  nothing  bat  stale  eggs  in  the  castle. '  " 
No  one  was  more  surprised  than  Sunnier  at  the 
freedom  with  which  he  was  admitted  into  all  that 
was  best  in  English  society.  A  cordial  welcome 
from  the  lawyers  was  to  be  expected  both  from  his 
recommendations  and  from  his  own  attainments  in 
jurisprudence.  But  this  was  a  mere  incident  of  the 
warm-heartedness  with  which  he  was  everywhere 
received.  A  letter  of  introduction  to  Earl  Fitz- 
william  led  to  an  intimate  friendship  and  many 
happy  hours  at  Wentworth  House  and  Milton  Park. 
In  the  high-minded  Lord  Morpeth,  later  seventh  Earl 
of  Carlisle,  he  found  a  congenial  spirit,  and  an  inti 
macy  was  quickly  established  which  ended  only  with 
death.  The  aged  Earl  of  Leicester  welcomed  him 
to  the  sumptuous  hospitalities  of  Holkham  House, 
where  Surnner  admired  the  splendid  paintings  of 
Titian,  Raphael,  Da  Vinci  and  Van  Dyck,  and  for 
hours  pored  with  delight  over  the  crabbed  pages 


54  CHAKLES  SUMNEB 

which  bore  the  mark  of  the  great  Coke's  pen.  Lord 
Wharncliffe,  Lord  Durham,  and  Lord  Holland  made 
him  their  guest.  Of  the  many  public  men  whom 
Sumner  met,  none  was  more  kind  than  Lord 
Brougham.  Sunnier' s  letters  give  interesting  pic 
tures  of  the  life  at  Brougham  Hall  and  glimpses  of 
its  master, — of  his  tenderness  toward  his  mother, 
his  devotion  to  his  invalid  daughter,  his  brilliant 
conversation,  "  his  versatility  and  universal  attain 
ments.  ' >  To  Sumner  it  was  a  mystery  why  this  man, 
at  the  time  almost  inaccessible,  should  have  shown 
the  young  American  student  such  marked  attention 
and  frank  cordiality  ;  but  to  a  common  friend  Lord 
Brougham  said  that  he  "had  never  met  with  any 
man  of  Sumner' s  age  of  such  extensive  legal  knowl 
edge  and  natural  legal  intellect,  and  predicted  that 
he  would  prove  an  honor  to  the  American  bar."  It 
was  said  at  the  time  that  Sumner  "made  the  ac 
quaintance  of  all  the  principal  Whig  families  going 
north,  and  of  the  Tories  on  his  return,"  and  he  him 
self  wrote  to  Lieber  :  "  I  have  been  received  with  a 
kindness,  hospitality  and  distinction  of  which  I  truly 
felt  my  unworthiness.  I  have  visited  many — per 
haps  I  may  say  most — of  the  distinguished  men  of 
these  glorious  countries  at  their  seats,  and  have  seen 
English  country  life,  which  is  the  height  of  refined 
luxury,  in  some  of  its  most  splendid  phases." 

But  not  less  stimulating  and  congenial  to  Sumner 
was  his  intercourse  with  the  leaders  of  English 
literature.  Emerson's  introduction  led  to  a  friend 
ship  with  Carlyle.  Landor,  entertaining  him  at 


EUBOPEAN  TRAVEL  55 

breakfast,  alternately  pleased  and  startled  him  by 
compliment  and  criticism  upon  his  English.  He 
spent  an  interesting  morning  with  Leigh  Hunt,  on 
an  introduction  from  Carlyle.  For  two  delightful 
days  he  was  the  guest  of  Sydney  Smith.  He  took 
tea  with  Wordsworth,  and  was  charmed  by  the 
simplicity,  grace  and  sincerity  of  his  manner  and 
conversation.  Lord  Jeffrey  of  the  Edinburgh  Review 
he  met  at  his  own  hearth,  and  was  vastly  impressed 
by  "his  talent,  fertility  of  expression  and  unlimited 
knowledge  (almost  learning).  He  spoke  on  every 
subject  and  always  better  than  anybody  else." 
Suuiuer  dined  repeatedly  in  company  with  Macau- 
lay,  and  was  struck  by  his  wide  knowledge  and 
brilliant  conversation ;  but  experience  led  him  to 
accept  Sydney  Smith's  verdict  that  in  social  inter 
course  Macaulay  was  ' '  a  tremendous  machine  for 
colloquial  oppression,"  for  he  poured  out  the  stores 
of  his  prodigious  memory  "  with  an  instructive  but 
dinning  prodigality," — a  social  fault  which  Sumner 
himself  developed  in  his  later  years.  He  saw  much 
of  Harriet  Martiueau,  whose  acquaintance  he  had 
already  made  in  America,  and  was  greatly  interested 
in  Mrs.  Shelley.  He  was  welcomed  in  the  homes  of 
Grote,  Hallam  and  Samuel  Eogers,  and  formed  a 
lasting  friendship  with  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Basil  Montagu. 
At  a  dinner  of  the  British  Association  for  the  Pro 
motion  of  Science,  Sumner  was  one  of  the  guests, 
and  made  an  impromptu  speech,  full  of  an  Ameri 
can's  appreciation  of  the  mother  country,  which  was 
quite  the  feature  of  the  occasion.  Not  the  least 


56  CHABLES  SUMNER 

interesting  of  the  hospitalities  showered  upon  him 
was  a  dinner  given  by  Colburn  the  publisher,  at 
which  were  present  Torn.  Campbell  "and  some  six 
or  eight  of  the  small  fry — the  minims  of  literature, 
all  guilty  of  print."  In  short,  when  Sumner  left 
England,  he  could  truthfully  say  to  Hillard  :  "I 
now  hardly  call  to  mind  a  person  in  England  that  I 
cared  to  see  whom  I  have  not  met  under  circum 
stances  the  most  agreeable  and  flattering  to  myself." 
It  remains  to  ask,  What  opened  wide  England's 
most  exclusive  doors  to  this  young  American  scholar  ? 
English  society  was  at  that  time  suspicious  of  visitors 
from  across  the  ocean.  Wordsworth  complained 
bitterly  to  Sumner  of  the  officiousness  and  indecency 
of  some  American  pen-drivers  who  had  invaded  the 
privacy  of  his  home  to  make  a  page  out  of  an  "in 
terview."  Sumner  was  but  twenty-seven,  though  he 
was  by  many  supposed  to  be  at  least  ten  years  older. 
He  had  no  established  reputation,  had  made  no  re 
markable  advance  in  his  profession,  and  had  given 
not  the  slightest  indication  of  the  career  that  lay 
before  him.  To  be  sure,  he  carried  letters  of  com 
mendation  from  friends,  but  he  presented  few  of 
them,  and  such  letters  rarely  lead  to  more  than  con 
ventional  courtesies,  unless  the  bearer  betters  his  in 
troduction.  In  England,  Scotland  and  Ireland,  Sum 
ner' s  travels  were  a  continuous  series  of  visits,  upon 
urgent  invitations  which  tt  grew  out  of  casual  meet 
ings  in  society  and  were  extended  in  a  spirit  of  kind 
ness  and  hospitality  which  made  his  heart  overflow 
as  he  thought  of  it."  Sumuer's  social  success  was 


EUROPEAN  TRAVEL  57 

due  alone  to  the  attractive  qualities  of  his  own 
personality.  He  was  young  and  full  of  generous 
enthusiasm.  His  omnivorous  reading  in  literature, 
history  and  jurisprudence  made  him  exceptionally 
intelligent  upon  topics  of  interest  to  leaders  of  Eng 
lish  thought,  and  like  Lowell  he  had  a  strong  feeling 
of  the  essential  unity  of  the  English-speaking  people 
which  made  him  thoroughly  at  home  in  England. 
Although  distinctly  lacking  in  wit  and  brilliancy, 
his  manner  and  conversation  were  instinct  with 
genuineness  and  appreciation.  As  one  of  his  friends 
said  of  him,  in  the  Quarterly  Review,  soon  after  his 
return  to  America  :  "  Mr.  Sumner  presents  in  his 
own  person  a  decisive  proof  that  an  American 
gentleman,  without  official  rank  or  wide-spread  repu 
tation,  by  mere  dint  of  courtesy,  candor,  an  entire 
absence  of  pretension,  an  appreciating  spirit,  and  a 
cultivated  mind,  may  be  received  on  a  perfect  foot 
ing  of  equality  in  the  best  English  circles,  social, 
political  and  intellectual  ;  which,  be  it  observed, 
are  hopelessly  inaccessible  to  the  itinerant  note- 
taker,  who  never  gets  beyond  the  outskirts  or  the 
show-houses.'7 

To  a  young  man  of  Sumner' s  susceptibilities,  these 
months  of  intimate  association  with  many  of  Eng 
land's  foremost  men  could  not  fail  to  prove  a  forma 
tive  influence  of  the  utmost  importance.  Their  ef 
fects  were  to  be  observed  not  only  in  the  broadening 
of  his  own  horizon,  but  in  the  added  power  which 
he  was  to  exercise,  particularly  as  head  of  the  Sen 
ate  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  during  most 


58  CHAELES  SUMNER 

critical  years,  both  because  of  his  thorough  under 
standing  of  European  politics,  and  of  his  personal 
acquaintance  with  party  leaders  and  moulders  of 
public  opinion. 

Indeed,  the  high  favor  with  which  Sumner  had 
conie  to  be  regarded  by  Englishmen  of  influence  was 
to  be  turned  to  speedy  account.  In  March,  1838,  he 
left  London  for  Italy.  In  Paris,  however,  he  was 
prevailed  upon  by  General  Lewis  Cass,  United 
States  Minister  to  France,  to  undertake  a  patriotic 
service,  which  detained  him  several  weeks.  Friendly 
relations  between  the  United  States  and  England 
were  at  the  time  much  disturbed  by  the  Northeast 
ern  Boundary  controversy  and  by  the  affair  of  the 
Caroline.  The  boundary  dispute  had  arisen  out  of 
ambiguity  of  the  language  used  in  the  Treaty  of 
1783,  and  all  attempts  to  secure  a  settlement  had 
proved  futile.  The  Americans  in  Paris  considered 
it  desirable  that  the  American  argument  be  plainly 
set  forth  so  that  it  might  be  clearly  appreciated  both 
in  England  and  on  the  Continent,  and  Sumner 
finally  yielded  to  their  urging  that  he  attempt  this 
task.  The  result  was  a  comprehensive  paper,  filling 
six  and  a  half  columns  in  Galignani's  Messenger, 
copies  of  which  were  sent  to  members  of  Parliament 
and  other  men  of  weight  in  England.  While  setting 
forth  the  American  argument  strongly,  the  spirit  of 
the  paper  was  candid  and  pacific,  and  it  made  a 
most  favorable  impression  both  in  England  and  in 
America.  When  in  Paris  at  this  time,  Sumner  saw 
much  of  Lord  Brougham,  who  later  in  the  House  of 


EUROPEAN  TRAVEL  69 

Lords  spoke  in  favor  of  the  American  view  of  this 
matter.  The  controversy,  it  will  be  remembered, 
was  finally  settled  in  1842  by  the  Treaty  of  Wash 
ington,  which  established  a  line  of  compromise. 

As  soon  as  this  task  was  finished,  Simmer  con 
tinued  his  journey  to  Italy.  A  month  was  devoted 
to  sightseeing  by  the  way,  and  on  the  21st  of  May, 
his  "fondest  expectations  all  on  tiptoe,"  from  the 
Alban  Hills  he  caught  his  first  glimpse  of  the  dome 
of  St.  Peter's.  Sunmer's  coming  to  Rome  was  the 
fulfilment  of  the  dearest  vision  of  his  youth.  His 
mind  was  richly  stored  with  the  treasures  of  history 
and  of  classic  literature,  and  at  sight  of  the  monu 
ments  of  "  the  greatness  that  was  Rome,"  he  thrilled 
as  with  a  pilgrim's  devotion.  He  never  ceased  to 
refer  to  the  mouths  spent  here  as  the  happiest  in  his 
life. 

Bat  in  his  eagerness  to  see  its  sights  he  did  not 
allow  himself  to  forget  his  purpose  to  know  Italy's 
life  and  literature.  To  this  end  at  first  he  left  his 
letters  of  introduction  unused  and  devoted  himself 
to  study  with  an  assiduity  which  soon  yielded  large 
returns.  At  the  end  of  the  summer  he  reported : 
' t  The  hot  months  passed  quickly  in  Rome.  My 
habits  were  simple.  Rose  at  half-past  six  o'clock, 
threw  myself  on  my  sofa,  with  a  little  round  table 
near,  well  covered  with  books,  read  undisturbed  till 
about  ten,  when  a  servant  brought  on  a  tray  my 
breakfast, — two  eggs  done  sur  le  plat,  a  roll  and  a 
cup  of  chocolate  ;  some  of  the  books  were  pushed 
aside  enough  to  give  momentary  place  to  the  tray. 


60  CHAELES  SUMNEB 

The  breakfast  was  concluded  without  quitting  the 
sofa  ;  rang  the  bell,  and  niy  table  was  put  to  rights, 
and  my  reading  went  on  often  till  five  or  six  o'clock 
in  the  evening,  without  niy  once  rising  from  the 
sofa.  Was  it  not  Gray's  heaven  !  "  At  the  end  of 
four  months  he  wrote  :  "There  is  no  Italian  which 
I  cannot  understand  without  a  dictionary  ;  there  is 
hardly  a  classic  in  the  language  of  which  I  have 
not  read  the  whole,  or  considerable  portions."  All 
of  Ariosto  he  despatched  on  the  road  to  Venice. 

But  the  glamour  that  hung  about  his  Italian  days 
was  due  not  alone  to  classical  associations  nor  to  the 
charms  of  Italian  literature.  He  formed  there  some 
of  his  warmest  friendships.  In  the  American  con 
sul,  George  W.  Greene,  he  found  a  true  scholar  and 
a  cultured  man,  with  whom  he  enjoyed  many  an 
hour,  most  of  all  a  retreat  of  several  days  in  the 
Franciscan  monastery  of  Palazzuola.  At  Eome 
Sumner  first  met  the  young  American  sculptor, 
Crawford,  in  whom  he  became  deeply  interested, 
and  in  whose  work  he  thought  he  detected  marked 
genius.  Crawford  had  as  yet  acquired  no  reputation 
in  his  own  country.  Smnner  wrote  in  his  behalf  to 
many  friends  in  Boston,  and  it  was  through  his  in 
strumentality  that  the  subscription  was  made  which 
led  to  the  purchase  of  Crawford's  "Orpheus"  for 
the  Boston  Athenaeum  (now  placed  in  the  Boston 
Art  Museum),  an  encouragement  which  did  much  to 
assure  the  young  sculptor's  future,  and  which  he  al 
ways  held  in  most  grateful  remembrance.  In  Flor 
ence,  too,  Sumner  took  great  delight  in  discussing 


EUROPEAN  TRAVEL  61 

sculptural  matters  with  Horatio  Greenough,  then  at 
work  upon  his  u  Washington,"  regarding  some  de 
tails  of  which  he  consulted  Sunnier.  He  also  met 
Hiram  Powers,  who  then  "  had  not  got  beyond  bust- 
making."  These  months  on  the  Continent  and 
especially  in  Italy  did  much  to  quicken  Sumner's  ar 
tistic  appreciation,  in  which  he  was  to  find  a' never- 
failing  source  of  pleasure  and  solace. 

In  the  autumn  Sumner  spent  a  month  in  Vienna. 
Here  he  was  cordially  received  by  Metternich,  who 
professed  the  greatest  regard  for  America,  saying 
that  it  was  young  and  Europe  old  :  l  i  Mais  laissons 
nous  jouir  de  not  re  vieillesse."  Five  weeks  in  Berlin 
were  filled  with  opportunity.  By  the  Crown  Prince 
and  Prince  William,  later  the  first  German  Emperor, 
he  was  well  received.  He  met  Humboldt  and  the 
historians,  Ranke  and  Raumer,  and  discussed  his 
favorite  theme,  the  codification  of  the  law,  with 
Savigny,  as  he  had  already  done  with  Brougham 
and  Sismondi.  This  topic  he  took  up  with  renewed 
interest  with  Thibaut,  the  head  of  the  philosophical 
school  of  jurists,  whom  he  met  at  Heidelberg, 
where  he  spent  five  delightful  weeks,  being  espe 
cially  indebted  for  courtesies  to  Professor  Mittel- 
maier,  with  whom  he  had  had  much  correspondence 
upon  legal  matters  before  leaving  America. 

But  his  European  days  were  now  drawing  to  a 
close.  His  friends  were  afraid  that  longer  sojourn 
abroad  would  retard  his  progress  in  his  profes 
sion,  and  those  who  knew  him  best,  like  Story  and 
Hillard,  advised  him  to  hasten  his  return.  Indeed, 


62  CHARLES  BUHNER 

he  needed  no  such  admonition.  He  knew  that  his 
European  experience  had  greatly  "swelled  the 
man's  amount "  ;  but,  as  the  months  passed,  he  had 
times  of  serious  depression.  As  he  confided  to 
Longfellow  :  u  I  now  begin  to  think  of  hard  work, 
of  long  days  tilled  with  uninteresting  toil  and 
humble  gains.  I  sometimes  have  a  moment  of  mis 
giving,  when  I  think  of  the  certainties  which  I 
abandoned  and  of  the  uncertainties  to  which  I  re 
turn."  To  Greene,  his  companion  of  fond  Italian 
memories,  he  wrote:  "To  me  is  unchanging 
drudgery,  where  there  are  no  flowers  to  pluck  by 
the  wayside — but  the  great  grindstone  of  the  law. 
There  must  I  work.  Sisyphus  l  rolled  the  rock  re 
luctant  up  the  hill,'  and  I  am  going  home  to  do  the 
same."  To  his  brother  George  he  acknowledged 
that  he  had  spent  more  than  five  thousand  dollars 
and  could  not  aiford  to  travel  longer,  adding  :  "I 
wish  you  a  deeper  purse  than  I  have,  health  to  en 
joy  Europe,  and  the  ability  to  profit  by  what  you 
see.  It  is  a  glorious  privilege,  that  of  travel.  Let 
us  make  the  most  of  it.  Gladden  my  American  ex 
ile  by  flashes  from  the  Old  World." 

For  a  young  man  who  could  use  such  words,  it 
was  high  time  to  get  back  to  his  native  land  and 
settle  down  to  some  serious  work.  From  Heidelberg 
he  went  down  the  Ehine,  and  crossed  to  London, 
which  he  had  left  almost  exactly  a  year  before.  In 
a  stay  of  less  than  three  weeks  he  could  do  nothing 
more  than  renew  his  acquaintance  with  a  few  of  the 
many  who  had  lavished  kindnesses  upon  him.  His 


EUROPEAN  TKAVEL  63 

last  dinner  was  with  Hallam,  at  whose  house  he  met 
Milman,  Hay  ward,  Francis  Horner  and  others. 
Sunnier  had  made  a  warm  place  for  himself  in 
many  an  English  home.  One  of  his  friends  wrote 
to  him:  "You  have  had  better  opportunities  of 
seeing  all  classes  of  society  and  all  that  is  interest 
ing  among  us,  than  any  other  of  your  countrymen.'' 
It  was  the  truth  ;  and  to  the  end  of  his  life  Sumner 
retained  a  deep  affection  for  England.  This,  how 
ever,  did  not  blind  him  to  many  of  the  evils  in  her 
society.  Although  he  had  been  the  recipient  of  un 
precedented  courtesies  from  English  people,  many 
of  them  members  of  the  nobility,  he  remained  a 
true  republican,  and  could  truthfully  declare  :  "I 
have  never  sat  in  the  palaces  of  England  without 
being  pained  by  the  inequality  of  which  the  inordi 
nate  luxury  was  a  token  ; "  the  injustice  of  the 
English  system  of  representation  and  the  burden  of 
primogeniture  he  clearly  recognized  and  deplored. 
Yet  he  felt  that  the  two  nations  were  one  people  in 
race  and  in  history,  and  it  was  to  be  one  of  the 
greatest  objects  of  his  life  to  remove  all  sources  of 
discord  between  them,  for  to  him  the  thought  that  they 
should  ever  be  at  war  with  each  other  was  monstrous. 
On  the  3d  of  May,  1840,  Sumner  landed  in  New 
York,  after  an  absence  from  America  of  nearly  two 
years  and  a  half, — a  stalwart  man  of  twenty-nine, 
with  fresh  memories  of  delightful  days  of  study  and 
leisurely  travel,  reluctantly  returning  to  gather  up 
the  loose  threads  of  a  petty  law  practice,  without  a 
glimmer  of  what  the  future  had  in  store  for  him. 


CHAPTER  IV 

"NO.    4  COURT  STREET  " 

UPON  his  return  to  his  native  city,  Sumner  found 
everywhere  a  warm  welcome.  His  social  successes 
abroad  commended  him  to  Boston's  most  exclusive 
society,  at  the  head  of  which  stood  a  group  of 
families,  closely  related  by  marriage  and  by  busi 
ness  interests,  and  quick  to  resent  alien  thought  or 
non-conformity  to  their  standards  in  social  and 
political  action.  George  Bancroft,  who  had  be 
come  prominent  in  the  counsels  of  the  Democratic 
party,  felt  the  chill  following  his  apostasy  from  the 
Whig  faith  which  held  the  allegiance  of  Boston7 s 
first  families,  and  Sumner  was  in  time  to  feel  the 
weight  of  similar  social  disapproval.  But  while 
he  was  still  a  prime  favorite  in  Boston  society, 
there  were  other  associations  which  brought  him 
greater  enjoyment.  There  were  chance  meetings 
with  congenial  spirits  like  Hawthorne  and  Frances 
Kemble.  He  now  became  a  frequent  and  an  admir 
ing  visitor  to  the  studio  of  Washington  Allston. 
Eufus  Choate's  office  was  in  the  same  building  with 
his  own,  and  they  found  many  interests  in  common. 
Among  the  new  friendships  that  with  William  H. 
Fresco tt  was  an  unfailing  joy.  Dr.  Channing, 
whom  Sumner  later  described  as  "one  of  the 


"NO.  4  COURT  STREET »  65 

purest,  brightest,  greatest  minds  of  this  age  .  .  . 
my  friend,  and,  I  may  almost  say,  idol  for  nearly 
ten  years,"  now  honored  the  young  man  with  his 
confidence  and  relied  upon  him  for  collaboration 
and  criticism  as  to  his  later  writings. 

But  most  of  all,  Sumner  rejoiced  in  the  fellow 
ship  of  the  "Five  of  Clubs,"  who  now  renewed 
their  meetings  with  unbroken  ranks.  With  Hillard 
there  was  the  delight  of  constant  intercourse  at  the 
office  ;  of  a  Saturday,  Sumner  generally  went  to 
Craigie  House  to  dine  and  spend  the  night  with 
Longfellow,  and  here  they  were  usually  joined  by 
Felton.  He  often  visited  Cleveland  at  Pine  Bank, 
and  it  was  here  that  he  met  Mrs.  Kemble.  After 
Cleveland's  death,  his  place  in  the  group  was  taken 
by  Dr.  Samuel  G.  Howe,  the  talented  superin 
tendent  of  the  Perkins  Institution  for  the  Blind. 
His  acquaintance  with  Sumner  dated  from  the  day 
when  the  two  met  while  fighting  in  support  of  the 
mayor  to  suppress  a  nativist  riot.  They  were  to 
stand  shoulder  to  shoulder  in  many  another  hard 
fight,  and  in  Dr.  Howe  and  his  accomplished  wife 
Sumner  was  for  years  to  find  two  of  his  dearest 
friends. 

The  Sumner  who  returned  from  Europe  was  quite 
a  different  man  in  externals  from  the  slender 
student  of  three  years  before.  He  had  gained 
greater  fulness  of  face  and  of  figure,  and  his  friends 
noted  that  he  had  "  been  very  materially  improved 
under  the  hands  of  a  London  tailor "  and  looked 
quite  like  an  Englishman. 


66  CHARLES  SUMNER 

While  in  Rome,  Suinner  had  been  saddened  by 
the  news  of  the  death  of  his  father,  for  whom  he 
had  always  had  a  filial  regard,  though  there  was 
little  congeniality  between  the  two.  Sheriff  Sumner 
led  a  gloomy,  Puritanical  life,  and  within  his  own 
family  his  was  a  rigid  rule,  which  could  not  fail  to 
antagonize  such  natures  as  Charles  and  his  vivacious 
brother,  George.  When  Sumner  had  escaped  to 
Europe  from  thepotestas  of  this  stern  paterfamilias, 
he  still  felt  for  his  brothers  and  sisters  and  wrote  to 
his  father  urging  that  for  the  younger  children  a 
milder  regime  might  be  adopted.  The  rigor  in  the 
home  was  somewhat  relaxed  the  following  year,  but 
Sumner' s  intervention  was  resented,  and  from  that 
time  no  letters  passed  between  father  and  son. 
This  lack  of  cordial  sympathy  with  his  father  was 
a  grief  to  him  for  many  years. 

For  several  months  after  his  return,  Sumner  did 
not  attempt  to  resume  practice.  It  was  the  summer 
season,  when  legal  work  was  not  pressing,  and  he 
devoted  this  period  to  making  visits,  renewing  ac 
quaintances  and  keeping  up  his  enormous  corre 
spondence  with  friends  abroad.  In  September, 
however,  he  began  to  put  in  long  hours  at  No.  4 
Court  Street.  But  it  was  hard  to  get  acclimated. 
Later  he  confessed  that  this  year  was  the  least  pro 
ductive  of  his  life.  Practice  came  but  slowly. 
There  was  more  or  less  work  to  be  done.  He 
shared  with  Hillard  the  office  business,  and  Story 
and  Greenleaf  enlisted  his  services  in  some  cases  in 
which  they  were  interested.  Sumner' s  most  im- 


"NO.  4  COUKT  STKEET"  67 

portant  case  was  one  iu  which  he  succeeded  Green  - 
leaf  in  contesting  the  validity  of  the  Phillips  patent 
for  friction  matches.  It  had  already  been  in  the 
courts  for  five  years.  Sumner  devoted  himself  to 
the  matter  with  great  assiduity,  but  it  dragged  on 
for  three  years  more.  At  the  final  trial  it  occupied 
eleven  days  before  the  jury ;  in  closing  Sumner  spoke 
ten  hours,  and  upon  the  action  of  tort  secured  a 
verdict  in  favor  of  his  client. 

He  worked  with  dogged  persistency,  and  in  time 
might  have  become  a  lawyer  of  some  eminence. 
Large  money  returns  did  not  allure  him,  although, 
in  view  of  his  scanty  income  and  the  debts  incurred 
for  his  travel, — debts  which  it  is  supposed  his 
mother  finally  paid  from  the  estate, — it  was  a  satis 
faction  when  he  could  report :  '  *  Business  calls.  I 
charged  one  client  yesterday,  as  part  of  my  fee  in 
a  case,  six  hundred  dollars.  He  had  the  grace  to 
say  that  it  was  no  more  than  he  expected,  and  not 
so  much  as  I  deserved.'7  But  such  fees  came  sel 
dom,  and  it  was  not  long  before  Sumner' s  friends 
recognized  that  there  were  serious  obstacles  in  the 
way  of  his  attaining  distinguished  success  at  the 
bar.  For  much  of  the  lawyer's  routine  work  he 
seemed  to  have  an  insuperable  repugnance.1  To  a 

1  u  He  was  not  formed  for  a  jury  lawyer,  when  the  jury  was 
less  than  a  nation  or  mankind.  .  .  .  Sunmer'a  legal  mind, 
at  this  time  and  throughout  his  life,  was  largely  moulded, 
trained  to  the  contemplation  of  great  principles  and  to  lofty  re 
search.  As  one  of  his  admiring  comrades,  himself  a  renowned 
lawyer,  says  of  him,  '  In  sporting  terms,  he  had  a  good  eye  for 
country,  but  no  scent  for  a  trail.'" — G.  W.  Curtis,  Orations, 
Vol.  Ill,  p.  210. 


68  CHARLES  SUMNER 

friend  he  once  wrote:  "I  fouud  the  bill  of  costs 
without  understanding  it  5  and  I  sometimes  believe 
that  it  is  not  in  my  power  to  understand  anything 
which  concerns  such  matters. "  William  Wetmore 
Story,  another  young  man  of  high  aspirations  who 
had  not  yet  found  himself,  was  then  a  law  student 
at  "  No.  4,"  and  has  left  an  interesting  picture  of 
life  in  that  office.  Of  Sumner  he  writes :  "He 
would  talk  to  me  by  the  hour  of  the  great  jurists, 
and  their  lives,  and  habits  of  thought.  .  .  . 
Hillard  and  he  and  I  used  to  talk  infinitely,  not 
only  of  law,  but  of  poetry  and  general  literature 
and  authors,  when  business  would  allow, — nay, 
sometimes  when  it  would  not  allow  ;  but  who  can 
resist  temptation  with  such  tastes  as  we  all  had?" 
It  was  evident  that  the  fears  of  his  friends  and  his 
own  misgivings  were  being  realized :  in  his  "Ameri 
can  exile,"  he  could  find  no  enthusiasm  for  his 
work.  The  keen -eyed  student  at  his  side  noticed 
that  "after  the  flush  of  those  exciting  days  abroad, 
his  office  and  daily  occupations  seemed  dull  and 
gray.  .  .  .  America  seemed  flat  to  him  after 
Europe."  His  letters  to  friends  abroad  show  where 
his  heart  lay.  To  Lieber  he  wrote:  "Never  at 
any  time  since  I  have  been  at  the  bar  have  I  been 
more  punctual  and  faithful.  Pocket  that,  ye  croak 
ers,  who  said  that  Europe  would  spoil  me  for  office 
work  !  Still,  I  will  not  disguise  from  you,  my  dear 
Lieber,  that  I  feel,  while  I  am  engaged  upon  these 
things,  that,  though  I  earn  my  daily  bread,  I  lay  up 
none  of  the  bread  of  life.  My  mind,  soul,  heart, 


"NO.  4  COUKT  STKEET"  69 

are  not  improved  or  invigorated  by  the  practice  of 
my  profession  ;  by  overhauling  papers,  old  letters, 
and  sifting  accounts,  in  order  to  see  if  there  be  any 
thing  on  which  to  plant  an  action.  The  sigh  will 
come  for  a  canto  of  Dante,  a  rhapsody  of  Homer,  a 
play  of  Schiller.  But  I  shall  do  my  devoir." 

In  virtual  acknowledgment  of  failure  in  his 
practice,  Sunnier  gradually  turned  more  and  more 
to  outside  tasks.  In  the  absence  of  Judge  Story, 
he  lectured  as  a  substitute  in  the  law  school  in  1842 
and  again  the  following  year.  He  renewed  his 
writing  for  various  legal  magazines  upon  his  favorite 
topics,— judges,  lawyers,  and  publicists.  He  was  a 
careful  and  keen  critic,  always  eager  to  commend 
what  was  of  merit,  but  scathing  in  denunciation  of 
bad  work,  so  that  he  sometimes  aroused  deep  resent 
ment.  In  one  instance  a  writer's  article  was  so  cut 
up  that  he  came  on  from  New  York  to  Boston,  in 
tending  to  challenge  the  critic  to  a  duel,  but  Sum- 
ner's  fortunate  absence  from  the  city  gave  wrath 
time  to  cool.  In  the  autumn  following  his  return 
from  Europe  he  had  brought  out  the  third  volume 
of  his  "Keports"  of  Judge  Story7  s  Circuit  Court 
opinions.  The  task  of  the  court  reporter  was  dis 
tinctly  congenial  to  Sumner.  Although  he  re 
peatedly  declared  that  he  did  not  know  the  office 
that  was  worth  asking  for,  or  asking  any  influence 
to  procure,  he  acknowledged  that,  with  a  single 
exception,  there  was  one  which  he  might  prefer 
to  any  in  the  country  and  an  appointment  to 
which  would  be  agreeable  to  him,  if  it  came  un- 


70  CHARLES  SUMNER 

solicited  on  his  part.  This  office  of  his  preference 
was  undoubtedly  that  of  Reporter  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States,  held  at  the  time  by  his 
old  friend,  Mr.  Peters.  He  would  have  enjoyed  its 
drudgery.  Moreover,  Sumner  was  in  a  similar 
position  to  that  of  his  father,  when  he  became 
sheriff:  with  no  liking  for  and  no  prospect  of 
marked  success  in  the  work  of  the  practicing 
lawyer,  he  would  have  welcomed  the  fixed  salary 
which  attached  to  this  office.  But  in  1843  when 
the  vacancy  occurred,  it  was  filled  during  Judge 
Story's  absence.  And  so  another  door  was  closed. 

Early  in  1844  Sumuer  undertook  a  heart-breaking 
task  :  for  the  sum  of  $2,000  he  contracted  to  anno 
tate  the  "Equity  Reports"  of  Francis  Vesey,  Jr., 
in  twenty  volumes,  agreeing  to  make  ready  one  vol 
ume  every  two  weeks.  He  began  this  work  April 
10th  ;  but  it  soon  became  evident  that  the  task  was 
altogether  too  heavy  for  the  allotted  time,  yet  the 
publishers  refused  an  extension  of  even  a  single 
month.  Sumner  bent  to  the  work,  making  diligent 
use  of  the  rich  material  which  had  accumulated 
since  the  publication  of  Vesey,  and  adding — an  un 
usual  feature,  but  one  peculiarly  congenial  to  his 
cast  of  mind — biographical  sketches  of  the  judges 
and  lawyers  mentioned  in  the  text.  The  edition  was 
dedicated  to  Judge  Story,  and  was  very  favorably 
reviewed  by  law  journals  ;  one  declared  :  "In  what 
may  be  called  the  literature  of  the  law,  he  [Sumner] 
has  no  rival  among  us."  But  "the  dreary,  never- 
lightening  task"  soon  proved  too  great  even  for 


"NO.  4  COUKT  STKEET'  71 

Sumuer's  splendid  physique.  With  only  four  vol 
umes  completed,  he  succumbed  to  a  fever,  and  for 
many  days  his  life  hung  in  the  balance.  Then  grad 
ually  his  extraordinary  vitality  reasserted  itself. 
During  his  illness  his  bedside  was  sought  by  many 
sympathetic  friends;  the  members  of  the  "Five  of 
Clubs,"  Prescott  and  Bancroft  were  among  the  most 
constant.  Many  a  tender  message  from  England 
showed  how  wide-spread  was  the  solicitude  for  his 
recovery.  Strength  returned  but  slowly.  It  was 
not  till  November  that  he  was  able  to  get  back  to  his 
office.  Meantime,  the  wretched  task  which  had 
broken  him  down  had  been  carried  on  by  others. 
Nine  volumes  still  remained  for  his  annotation.  At 
last,  in  May,  he  could  report:  "The  edition  (in 
twenty  volumes)  is  all  printed  ;  and  that  millstone 
has  fallen  from  my  neck." 

In  the  months  of  his  convalescence  Sumner  had 
discovered  in  himself  a  new  appreciation  of  beauty 
in  nature.  He  spent  some  weeks  in  a  delightful 
round  of  visits  with  friends  in  the  Berkshires. 
Here  he  renewed  his  acquaintance  with  Mrs.  Kem- 
ble,  with  whom  he  enjoyed  horseback  riding.  On 
his  way  home,  he  had  the  pleasure  of  meeting  in 
New  York  Crawford,  whom  he  had  not  seen  since 
he  left  Eome,  and  whose  career  had  been  in  no  small 
degree  assured  by  Sumner's  commendation  to  his 
Boston  friends.  But  he  was  soon  called  home  by 
sad  news.  His  beautiful  and  best  loved  sister.  Mary, 
had  been  in  failing  health  for  several  years.  Her 
death  was  a  great  grief  to  Charles,  who  had  always 


72  CHAELES  SUMXEB 

loved  her  tenderly ;  many  references  to  her  in  his 
letters  afford  some  of  the  most  intimate  and  beauti 
ful  glimpses  of  his  character. 

Sumner,  himself,  felt  little  attachment  to  life. 
Again  and  again,  upon  the  death  of  some  friend,  he 
would  exclaim:  "Why  was  he  selected  who  was 
reluctant  to  go,  and  another  left  who  has  little  pleas 
ure  in  staying  f ' '  When,  in  the  crisis  of  his  illness, 
the  physician  told  him  that  his  case  was  incurable, 
and  that,  if  he  should  live,  he  would  never  be  able 
to  do  anything,  Sunmer  replied  that  he  did  not 
shrink  from  death  but  that  to  pass  through  life  doing 
nothing,  perhaps  a  "  driveler  and  a  show,"  was 
more  than  he  could  bear.  A  few  weeks  later  he 
wrote  to  Howe  :  l  i  For  such  a  signal  recovery  another 
person  would  feel  unbounded  gratitude.  I  am  going 
to  say  what  will  offend  you  ;  but  what  I  trust  God 
will  pardon.  Since  my  convalescence  I  have 
thought  much  and  often  whether  I  have  any  just 
feeling  of  gratitude  that  my  disease  was  arrested. 
Let  me  confess  to  you  that  I  cannot  find  it  in  my 
bosom.  .  .  .  Why  was  I  spared  ?  For  me  there 
is  no  future  of  usefulness  or  happiness." 

This  period  brought  to  Sumner  broadened  associa 
tions  along  various  lines.  In  the  summer  following 
his  return  from  Europe,  he  took  his  father's  place 
in  the  Society  of  the  Cincinnati.  In  1844  he  was 
elected  to  membership  in  the  American  Antiquarian 
Society,  and  in  the  same  year  he  became  a  corre 
sponding  member  of  the  New  York  Historical  Society. 
Some  effective  popular  expositions  of  legal  princi- 


"NO.  4  COUET  STREET"  73 

pies,  which  Sumner  had  contributed  to  Boston  pa 
pers,  led  the  friends  of  Alexander  Slidell  Mackenzie 
to  appeal  to  the  young  lawyer  to  come  to  the  defense 
of  that  commander  in  the  Somers  mutiny  contro 
versy.1  To  bring  public  opinion  to  Mackenzie's 
support  was  the  task  urged  upon  Sumner,  and  in 
response  to  it  he  contributed  to  the  North  American 
Review 2  a  convincing  article,  in  which  with  great 
force  he  argued  that  the  real  question  at  issue  was 
neither  the  actual  guilt  of  the  conspirators  nor  the 
actual  necessity  for  their  execution,  but  their  ap 
parent  guilt  and  the  apparent  necessity,  as  carefully 

*Upon  this  United  States  brig-of-war,  September  12,  1842, 
there  had  sailed  for  the  coast  of  Africa  a  number  of  apprentice 
boys  from  the  Naval  School,  and  Philip  Spencer,  son  of  John 
C.  Spencer,  at  the  time  Secretary  of  War,  held  the  rank  of  mid 
shipman.  He  was  a  breeder  of  mischief  throughout  the  voyage, 
and  it  was  discovered  that  he  was  the  ringleader  in  a  conspiracy 
to  seize  the  ship,  murder  the  officers,  and  hoist  the  pirate's  flag. 
Some  of  the  conspirators  were  put  in  confinement ;  but  this  de 
veloped  so  mutinous  a  spirit  among  the  crew  that  the  com 
mander,  whose  intention  had  been  to  bring  all  the  prisoners  to 
the  United  States  for  trial,  decided  to  take  the  formal  advice 
of  his  officers.  This  council  made  a  careful  investigation,  as  the 
result  of  which  they  signed  a  report  in  which  they— "  bearing 
in  mind  our  duty  to  our  God,  our  country  and  to  the  service  " 
— advised  that  Spencer  and  two  of  his  confederates  be  imme 
diately  hanged  at  the  yard-arm,  a  sentence  which  was  executed 
four  days  before  the  brig  reached  St.  Thomas.  Spencer  and 
one  of  his  confederates  had  not  only  made  full  confession  of 
guilt,  but  acknowledged  the  justice  of  the  penalty.  Heated 
discussion,  however,  straightway  arose  as  to  the  guilt  of  the 
second  confederate.  Commander  Mackenzie  was  brought  before 
a  court-martial,  whose  sessions  of  forty  days  resulted  in  his  ac 
quittal,  a  verdict  which  President  Tyler  confirmed.  Neverthe 
less,  by  virtue  of  his  position  as  Secretary  of  War,  Spencer's 
father  and  his  friends  were  able  to  arouse  very  severe  censure 
of  Commander  Mackenzie's  action. 

2  Vol.  LVII,  pp.  195-241. 


74  CHAELES  SUMNER 

weighed  by  conscientious  men,  who  felt  full  respor- 
sibility  for  the  United  States  vessel  and  the  lives 
committed  to  their  charge.  This  article  exercised 
wide-spread  influence.  For  this  defense  Mackenzie 
himself  felt  the  deepest  gratitude,  which  he  showed 
by  entertaining  Sumner  at  his  home  and  by  a  mes 
sage  of  appreciation  and  good- will  in  a  sealed  letter 
opened  after  his  death.1 

Of  the  novelties  of  the  day,  phrenology  for  a  time 
aroused  Sumner' s  interest.  With  his  friend,  Dr. 
Howe,  he  performed  some  experiments  which  seemed 
to  him  to  "show  clearly  that  our  brains  are  mapped 
out  as  the  phrenologists  have  described."  He  pro 
cured  a  plaster  cast,  and  set  himself  to  studying  it 
with  great  earnestness.  Several  years  later  he  up 
braided  the  editor  of  the  North  American  Review  for 
* '  intolerance  of  mind  in  having  treated  phrenology 
flippantly."  But  this  interest  soon  ceased  to  have 
any  hold  upon  him. 

The  " temperance"  movement,  which  in  these 
years  exercised  a  great  deal  of  political  influence, 

1  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  this  Commander  Alexander 
Slidell  Mackenzie  was  an  own  brother  of  John  Slidell,  who  was 
senator  from  Louisiana  at  the  time  of  Sumner's  election  to  the 
Senate.  A  few  weeks  later  the  two  were  guests  at  the  same 
hotel  in  Saratoga,  hut  on  being  introduced  to  Sumner,  Slidell 's 
manner  was  very  reserved  ;  he  declined  an  invitation  from  a 
common  friend  to  meet  Sumner  at  dinner,  explaining  a  few 
days  later  that,  while  grateful  for  Sumner's  "  chivalrous  and 
zealous  advocacy  "  of  his  brother,  his  social  relations  could  not 
be  candid  with  a  man  of  Sumner's  "avowed  purpose  toexclude 
in  his  region  the  class  to  which  he  [Slidell]  belonged  from  the 
courtesies  of  social  life  and  the  common  rites  of  humanity." 
After  Sumner  entered  the  Senate,  however,  the  two  men  for 
some  time  were  upon  friendly  terms. 


"NO.  4  COURT  STKEET"  75 

4id  not  appeal  to  Sumiier.  He  was  temperate  in 
liis  own  habits;  he  justified  the  moderate  use  of 
wine,  and  felt  no  sympathy  with  any  political  move 
ment  having  prohibition  as  its  object. 

Suinner's  brother,  Horace,  was  for  a  time  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Brook  Farm  community  and  his  college 
friend,  Browne,  tried  hard  to  interest  Sumner  in  the 
transcendental  philosophy  there  taught  and  prac 
ticed.  But  Sumner  refers  in  rather  contemptuous 
tone  to  his  brother's  bucolic  employments.  He  be 
lieved  that  humanity's  triumphs  were  to  be  won  not 
in  an  isolated  community,  but  in  the  ranks  with  his 
fellows. 

As  a  young  man  Sumner  had  taken  very  seriously 
his  duty  as  the  oldest  brother  to  encourage  the 
younger  members  of  the  family  to  do  their  best  in 
their  studies.  While  in  Europe  he  had  written 
anxious  letters  to  President  Quincy  and  Judge 
Story,  urging  that  the  standards  of  scholarship  at 
Harvard  be  raised.  In  these  early  years  of  his 
practice,  accordingly,  Horace  Mann  found  in  him 
an  ardent  supporter  of  his  propaganda  for  the  pro 
motion  of  popular  education.  In  a  highly  favor 
able  review,  he  commended  Mann's  report  of  Euro 
pean  systems  of  education.  In  1844  he  accepted  the 
Whig  nomination  for  one  of  the  two  members  of  the 
school  committee  from  his  ward.  The  other  Whig 
candidate  was  elected,  but  Sumner  was  defeated  by 
a  native  American.  In  the  belief  that  the  equip 
ment  of  the  normal  schools  of  the  state  was  entirely 
inadequate,  in  1845  Sumuer  acted  as  chairman  of  a 


76  CHAELES  SUMNER 

committee  which  petitioned  the  legislature  in  favor 
of  the  erection  of  two  new  buildings.  He  personally 
solicited  subscriptions  and  even  incurred  far  heavier 
financial  responsibility  than  he  had  a  right  to  af 
ford,  in  order  to  accomplish  that  end. 

In  view  of  the  career  which  was  so  soon  to  open  be 
fore  him,  it  is  surprising  that  up  to  this  point  Sumuer 
apparently  felt  neither  any  aptitude  nor  any  liking 
for  politics.  Returning  to  America  in  1840,  he  wrote 
a  few  months  later  to  an  English  friend :  i  i  Our  pol 
itics  are  shabby  enough.  .  .  .  They  [the  Whigs] 
proclaimed  Harrison  the  candidate  of  the  *  log-cabin 
and  hard-cider  class.'  And  this  vulgar  appeal  is 
made  by  the  party  professing  the  monopoly  of  intel 
ligence  and  education  in  the  country  ! "  To  his 
brother  George  he  declared:  " There  are  some 
(among  whom  I  am  willing  to  be  counted)  who  think 
success  obtained  by  such  vulgar  means  of  very 
doubtful  value.  But  the  greater  part  think  nothing 
of  these  things,  and  are  now  in  full  cry,  running 
down  their  game."  He  took  no  part  in  the  cam 
paign,  and  it  is  not  known  for  whom  he  voted.  At 
the  time  of  the  next  presidential  election,  he  was  re 
covering  from  a  serious  illness  ;  and  there  is  no  in 
dication  that  he  felt  any  interest  in  the  contest. 
The  distinctive  tenets  of  the  Whig  party,  its  policy 
as  to  the  tariff  and  the  national  bank,  however 
strongly  they  commended  it  to  the  commercial  aris 
tocracy  of  Boston,  could  make  slight  appeal  to  a 
man  of  Summer's  idealism.  But  in  contrast  with 
their  opponants,  the  Whigs  seemed  to  him  less 


"NO.  4  COURT  STREET"  77 

under  the  dominance  of  the  slave  power  and  more 
disposed  to  high-minded  and  peaceful  dealings  with 
foreign  states.  Like  John  Quincy  Adams,  whom 
of  all  American  public  men  he  most  admired,  Surn- 
ner  still  marched  with  the  Whigs,  because  he 
1  i  thought  this  party  represented  the  moral  senti 
ments  of  the  country, — that  it  was  the  party  of  Hu 
manity.  " 


CHAPTER  V 

"THE  TRUE  GRANDEUR  OF  NATIONS" 

AMONG  the  institutions  that  had  fostered  the 
civic  pride,  for  which  from  early  days  Boston  had 
been  famous,  the  Fourth  of  July  oration  played  an 
important  part.  Boston  has  never  lacked  self-con 
sciousness.  In  the  days  just  before  the  outbreak  of 
the  Revolution,  she  saw  in  herself — as  England  saw 
in  her — the  protagonist  of  the  colonists  in  their  as 
sertion  of  what  they  deemed  their  rights  as  British 
subjects,  and  local  pride  speedily  cast  about  certain 
scenes  and  actors  an  aureole,  which  quite  transfig 
ured  them  in  memory.  Thus,  the  event  of  March 
5,  1770,  characterized  by  one  critical  twentieth 
century  historian  as  a  "  serious  affray"  in  which 
u  the  mob  was  fired  upon  by  the  angry  and  fright 
ened  soldiers,"  forthwith  found  its  place  in  local 
annals  as  the  u  Boston  Massacre."  Its  victims  were 
added  to  the  noble  army  of  the  martyrs,  to  be  com 
memorated  to  remote  generations  by  the  monument 
on  Boston  Common  to  the  almost  mythical  Crispus 
Attucks  and  his  fellows. 

On  the  very  first  anniversary  of  this  event  the 
citizens  of  Boston  came  together  to  listen  to  an  ap 
propriate  oration,  and  the  precedent  was  observed 
in  each  succeeding  year.  Soon  after  the  close  of  the 


1  <  THE  TRUE  GRANDEUR  OF  NATIONS  ' »    79 

Revolutionary  War,  the  citizens  of  Boston,  at  a 
town -meeting  in  Faueuil  Hall,  adopted  a  resolution 
which,  after  asserting  that  this  celebration  had 
"  been  found  to  be  of  eminent  advantage  to  the  cause 
of  America  in  disseminating  the  principles  of  virtue 
and  patriotism  among  her  citizens,"  declared  that 
from  that  time  forward  "  the  anniversary  of  the 
4th  day  of  July,  A.  D.  1776,  .  .  .  shall  be  con 
stantly  celebrated  by  the  delivery  of  a  public  ora 
tion  ...  in  which  the  orator  shall  consider  the 
feelings,  manners,  and  principles  which  led  to  this 
great  national  event,  as  well  as  the  important  and 
happy  effects,  whether  general  or  domestic,  which 
already  have,  and  will  forever  continue,  to  flow 
from  this  auspicious  epoch. "  And  so  for  threescore 
years  and  more  this  patriotic  festival  had  been  ob 
served,  the  oration  being  delivered  in  Faneuil  Hall, 
the  Old  South  Church,  or  in  one  of  the  larger  as 
sembly  halls. 

The  choice  of  orator  usually  fell  upon  some  prom 
ising  young  man,  and  the  typical  oration,  as  John 
Adams  (who  had  listened  with  fortitude  to  many  of 
them)  declared,  was  characterized  by  " juvenile  in 
genuity,"  and  usually  set  forth  in  conventional 
phrases  admiration  for  Greek  and  Roman  heroism, 
evidencing  little  critical  weighing  of  the  events  of  the 
Revolution,  or  originality  in  the  discussion  of  pres 
ent-day  problems. 

In  1845,  at  whose  suggestion  it  is  not  known, 
Charles  Sumner  was  notified  by  a  committee  of  the 
city  government  that  he  had  been  chosen  orator  for 


80  CHAKLES  8UMNEE 

Independence  Day.  The  invitation  came  so  late  as 
to  allow  hardly  two  mouths  for  preparation.  His 
correspondence  shows  that  he  accepted  with  a  hesi 
tation  not  unnatural  in  one  so  untrained  for  such  an 
effort.  He  made  no  demonstration  in  getting  to 
work  upon  it,  and  his  friends,  particularly  Feltou, 
repeatedly  urged  him  to  devote  himself  to  his  writ 
ing  with  diligence,  mindful  that  he  was  to  have  a 
"  numerous  and  distinguished  audience." 

Heralded  by  the  boom  of  guns,  the  sun  rose  clear 
on  the  morning  of  July  4th.  The  streets,  the  Com 
mon  and  the  Public  Garden  were  soon  astir  with  an 
animated  throng.  There  was  a  procession  of  800 
school-children  in  gala  attire.  The  national  colors 
were  everywhere  displayed.  In  the  harbor  lay  the 
United  States  ship -of -war,  Ohio,  brilliantly  be 
decked  with  flags.  Soon  after  ten,  under  escort  of 
the  Washington  Light  Guard,  the  officers  of  the 
city  government,  led  by  the  mayor  and  the  orator 
of  the  day,  marched  from  the  City  Hall  to  Tremont 
Temple.  Seated  upon  the  platform,  Sumner 
watched  the  assembling  audience.  Behind  him 
was  a  choir  of  young  girls  from  the  Boston  public 
schools,  all  dressed  in  white.  Below,  at  his  left, 
his  eye  rested  on  the  Washington  Light  Guard,  be 
hind  their  officers,  while  at  his  right  in  the  front 
seats  in  full  uniform  sat  the  superior  officers  of  the 
commonwealth's  militia  and  of  the  United  States 
army  and  navy.  It  was  felt  that  in  previous  years 
the  Federal  branches  of  the  service  had  been  some 
what  slighted  at  this  festival,  and  so  it  was  in  re- 


' (  THE  TRUE  GRANDEUK  OF  NATIONS ' '    81 

spouse  to  special  invitations  that  these  officers  from 
the  navy-yard,  from  the  forts  and  from  the  visiting 
Ohio,  graced  the  occasion  by  their  august  presence. 
Of  that  brilliant  audience  of  more  than  2,000,  at 
least  one  in  every  twenty  was  in  military  attire. 

The  invocation  and  the  reading  of  the  Declaration 
of  Independence  were  followed  by  patriotic  songs 
by  the  choir.  Then  the  mayor  introduced  Sunmer. 
It  was  a  scene  long  to  be  remembered  when  this  tall 
and  handsome  young  man  stepped  forward  for  the 
first  time  to  face  a  great  popular  assembly  gathered 
to  hear  him.  The  "  Gawky "  Sumner  of  Latin 
School  days  had  developed  a  splendid  presence. 
He  now  stood  six  feet  four  inches  in  height,  and 
his  frame  already  gave  promise  of  the  commanding 
figure  of  his  later  years.  His  well-cut  face,  sur 
mounted  by  masses  of  dark  hair,  kindled  with 
animation  as  he  spoke.  Always  fond  of  rather 
distinctive  dress,  he  wore  to-day  a  blue  dress-coat 
with  brass  buttons,  and  waistcoat  and  trousers  of 
white.  His  voice  was  of  great  power,  and  he  used 
it  with  skill.  His  gestures  were  his  own,  the  most 
characteristic  being  the  swinging  of  his  hand  over 
his  head.  Eeferring  to  his  manuscript  only  for 
statistics,  he  spoke  for  more  than  two  hours,  yet  he 
held  the  close  attention  of  his  audience  to  the  end. 

With  but  a  brief  introduction,  in  which  in  words 
closely  modeled  upon  Plato  he  urged  that  our  most 
worthy  tribute  to  the  Fathers  of  the  Republic  would 
be  found  in  striving  to  excel  them  in  virtue  and  to 
increase  the  inheritance  which  they  had  bequeathed, 


82  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

Sumner  proceeded  to  aDiiounce  the  theme  of  his 
oration,  the  inquiry :  "  What,  in  our  age,  are  the 
true  objects  of  national  ambition ;  what  is  truly 
national  glory,  national  honor  ;  what  is  the  true 
grandeur  of  nations  ?  "  Tersely  illustrating  his  sub 
ject  by  contrasts,  he  made  timely  reference  to  the 
Texas  and  Oregon  issues,  declaring  "  a  war  with 
Mexico  would  be  mean  and  cowardly ;  with  Eng 
land  it  would  be  at  least  bold,  but  parricidal." 
And  forthwith  he  laid  down  his  main  thesis  :  "In 
our  age  there  can  be  no  peace  that  is  not  honorable  ; 
there  can  be  no  war  that  is  not  dishonorable."  l 
The  place,  the  occasion,  the  audience,  all  combined 
to  make  the  announcement  of  such  a  proposition 
sensational,  but  these  considerations  did  not  deter 
the  speaker.  With  a  wealth  of  illustration  from 
history  and  poetry  he  developed  his  theme  :  he  ex 
posed  the  true  character  of  war  by  noting  how 
military  heroes  were  lauded  by  the  names  of  brute 
and  savage  beasts  ;  he  emphasized  the  futility  of  war 
in  that  its  objects  are  often  unattained,  as  in  the  War 
of  1812,  where  the  alleged  causes  were  not  removed 
by  the  Treaty  of  Ghent ;  he  described  vividly  the 
senseless  wager  of  battle,  which  found  its  belated  sur 
vival  in  war  ;  and  he  denounced  in  scathing  terms  the 
approval  which  misguided  patriotism,  and  social 
esteem  and  even  the  church  had  bestowed  upon  the 
unreasoning  appeal  to  brute  force.  With  tremendous 

1  In  his  Works,  Sumner  softened  this  by  putting  it  in  the 
form  of  a  question.  "Can  there  be,  in  our  age,  any  peace 
that  is  not  honorable,  any  war  that  is  not  dishonorable?" 
Vol.  I,  p.  9. 


"  THE  TRUE  GKANDEUR  OF  NATIONS  "    83 

power  lie  emphasized  the  enormous  waste  involved 
in  military  preparations  and  manoeuvres, — expenses, 
he  insisted,  which  were  worse  than  wasted,  since 
often  instead  of  assuring  peace,  they  served  only  to 
incite  war,  whereas  the  spirit  of  comity  and  con 
ciliation  ensured  just  and  lasting  blessings;  he 
urged  that  the  United  States  lead  in  a  movement 
toward  disarmament,  and  closed  with  an  eloquent 
presentation  of  the  moral  virtues  in  which  the  true 
grandeur  of  nations  consists. 

Among  the  passages  of  most  power  was  an  effect 
ive  comparison  of  the  cost  to  the  community  of 
Harvard  University  and  of  the  Ohio,  then  lying  in 
Boston  harbor,  and  whose  officers  were  at  that  mo 
ment,  as  guests  of  the  city,  sitting  at  his  feet : 

"  There  now  swings  idly  at  her  moorings  in  this 
harbor  a  ship-of-the-liue,  the  Ohio  .  .  .  $834,845 
[has  been]  the  actual  cost  at  this  moment  of  that 
single  ship, — more  than  $100,000  beyond  all  the 
available  accumulations  of  the  richest  and  most 
ancient  seat  of  learning  in  the  land.  Choose  ye, 
my  fellow  citizens  of  a  Christian  state,  between 
the  two  caskets, — that  wherein  is  the  loveliness  of 
knowledge  and  truth,  or  that  which  contains  the 
carrion  death  ! " 

He  drove  the  lesson  home  still  harder  by  showing 
that  the  sum  annually  lavished  upon  the  Ohio  was 
more  than  four  times  the  yearly  expenditures  of 
Harvard  University.1 

1  Works,  Vol.  I,  p.  81.  Sixty  years  have  not  made  Sumner's 
line  of  argument  obsolete.  Naval  expenditures  for  the  year 
ending  the  week  before  Sunnier  uttered  these  words  were  in 


84  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

A  passage  of  genuine  pathos  set  forth  the 
brutality  of  war,  relieved  only  by  deeds  of  chivalry, 
which  it  borrowed  from  peace. 

"  But  war  crushes  with  bloody  heel  all  justice, 
all  happiness,  all  that  is  godlike  in  man. 
True,  it  cannot  be  disguised  that  there  are  passages 
in  its  dreary  annals  cheered  by  deeds  of  generosity 
and  sacrifice.  But  the  virtues  which  shed  their 
charm  over  its  horrors  are  all  borrowed  of 
Peace.  .  .  .  The  flowers  of  gentleness,  of  kind 
liness,  of  fidelity,  of  humanity,  which  flourish  in 
unregarded  luxuriance  in  the  rich  meadows  of 
Peace,  receive  unwonted  admiration  when  we  dis 
cern  them  in  War, — like  violets  shedding  their 
perfume  on  the  perilous  edge  of  the  precipice,  be 
yond  the  smiling  borders  of  civilization.  .  .  . 
God  be  praised  that  Sidney,  on  the  field  of  battle, 
gave  with  dying  hand  the  cup  of  cold  water  to  the 
dying  soldier  !  That  single  act  of  self- forgetful 
sacrifice  has  consecrated  the  fenny  field  of  Zutphen 
far,  oh !  far  beyond  its  battle  ;  it  has  consecrated 
thy  name,  gallant  Sidney,  beyond  any  feat  of  thy 
sword,  beyond  any  triumph  of  thy  pen  !  But  there 
are  hands  outstretched  elsewhere  than  on  fields  of 
blood  for  so  little  as  a  cup  of  cold  water.  The 
world  is  full  of  opportunities  for  deeds  of  kindness. 

round  numbers  $6,300,000;  for  the  year  1908  they  were 
$118,725,000.  This  morning's  paper  tells  of  an  amendment 
(February  16.  1909)  cutting  down  the  appropriation  for  each  of 
two  new  battle-ships  to  $4  500,000,  not  including  armor  or 
armament.  Even  in  these  days  of  large  .benefactions,  that  ex 
penditure  for  each  unarmed  battle-ship  is  excelled  by  the  pro 
ductive  funds  of  not  more  than  ten  American  universities. 
Were  Sumner  speaking  to-day,  he  would  further  emphasize  the 
appalling  rate  at  which  battle-ships  depreciate  and  become 
obsolete. 


<  <  THE  TEUE  GE ANDEUE  OF  NATION  S  "    85 

Let  me  not  be  told,  then,  of  the  virtues  of  War. 
Let  not  the  acts  of  generosity  and  sacrifice  which 
have  triumphed  on  its  fields  be  invoked  in  its  de 
fense.  In  the  words  of  Oriental  imagery,  the 
poisonous  tree,  though  watered  by  nectar,  can  pro 
duce  only  the  fruit  of  death  !  "  l 

Truly  prophetic  were  his  references  to  emancipa 
tion  and  to  disarmament : 

"What  glory  of  battle  in  England's  annals  will 
not  fade  by  the  side  of  that  great  act  of  justice,  by 
which  her  legislature,  at  a  cost  of  one  hundred 
million  dollars,  gave  freedom  to  eight  hundred  thou 
sand  slaves !  And  when  the  day  shall  come  (may 
these  eyes  be  gladdened  by  its  beams ! )  that  shall 
witness  an  act  of  greater  justice  still, — the  peaceful 
emancipation  of  three  millions  of  our  fellow  men, 
1  guilty  of  a  skin  not  colored  as  our  own,'  now  held 
in  gloomy  bondage  under  the  Constitution  of  our 
country, — then  shall  there  be  a  victory,  in  compari 
son  with  which  that  of  Bunker  Hill  shall  be  as  a 
farthing  candle  held  up  to  the  sun.  That  victory 
shall  need  no  monument  of  stone.  It  shall  be  writ 
ten  on  the  grateful  hearts  of  uncounted  multitudes, 
that  shall  proclaim  it  to  the  latest  generation.  It 
shall  be  one  of  the  great  landmarks  of  civilization  ; 
nay,  more,  it  shall  be  one  of  the  links  of  the  golden 
chain  by  which  humanity  shall  connect  itself  with 
the  throne  of  God." 

"Let  us  now,  in  this  age  of  civilization,  sur 
rounded  by  Christian  nations,  be  willing  to  follow 
the  successful  example  of  William  Penn,  surrounded 
by  savages.  Let  us,  while  we  recognize  the  tran 
scendent  ordinances  of  God,  the  Law  of  Right  and 

1  Works,  Vol.  I,  p.  125.  2  Works,  Vol.  I,  p.  127. 


86  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

the  Law  of  Love, — the  double  suns  which  illumine 
the  moral  universe, — aspire  to  the  true  glory,  and 
what  is  higher  than  glory,  the  great  good  of  taking 
the  lead  in  the  disarming  of  the  nations.  Let  us 
abandon  the  system  of  preparation  for  war  in  time 
of  peace  as  irrational,  unchristian,  vainly  prodigal 
of  expense,  and  having  a  direct  tendency  to  excite 
the  very  evil  against  which  it  professes  to  guard."  l 


Such  was  the  oration  which  greeted  this  conserva 
tive  Boston  audience,  accustomed  on  the  Fourth  of 
July  to  listen  to  "  young  men  of  promising  genius, 
whose  convictions  were  conformable  to  the  opinions 
of  the  moment."  It  is  needless  to  say  that  the  open 
ing  paragraphs  produced  a  sensation  and  that  what 
followed  gave  rise  to  intense  excitement.  It  was 
evident  at  the  outset  that  here  was  no  mere  elocu 
tionist  or  phrase-maker,  but  a  man  of  vigorous 
thought,  ready  and  perhaps  too  eager  to  assail  what 
he  believed  to  be  error,  no  matter  how  high  en 
throned.  His  references  to  the  Texas  and  Oregon 
policies  of  the  Polk  administration  called  out  open 
dissent  from  his  audience.  Later  the  opposition 
grew  more  bitter,  for  the  young  orator  exclaimed  : 
"What  is  the  use  of  the  standing  army?  What 
is  the  use  of  the  navy?"  and  in  sarcastic  vein  he 
referred  to  the  " farcical2  discipline,"  and  to  "men 
closely  dressed  in  padded  and  well-buttoned  coats  of 
blue,  besmeared  with  gold,  surmounted  by  a  huge 

1  Works,  Vol.   I,  p.  119. 

2 In  revising  the  oration  for  his  works,  he  substituted  "pain 
ful  "  for  this  word  !  Works,  Vol.  I,  p.  91. 


"  THE  TEUE  GBANDEUR  OF  NATIONS ' »    87 

mountain  cap  of  bearskin,  with  a  barbarous  device 
typical  of  brute  force,  a  tiger,  painted  on  oilskin, 
tied  with  leather  to  their  backs, — Christians  recogni 
zing  the  example  of  beasts  as  worthy  of  imitation 
by  man."  To  many  of  the  military  guests  in  the 
audience  it  seemed  that  they  had  been  "officially 
assailed  by  the  speaker  as  well  as  personally  in 
sulted."  They  decided  forthwith  to  leave  the 
hall  in  a  body,  and  were  only  dissuaded  by  the 
adjutant-general  of  the  commonwealth,  whom  they 
urged  to  lead  them,  but  who  insisted  that  such  a 
proceeding  would  seem  discourteous,  since  they 
were  all  guests  of  the  city.  As  the  excited  audience 
was  dispersing,  a  prominent  merchant  is  said  to 
have  shouted  :  "  Well,  if  that  young  man  is  going 
to  talk  in  that  way,  he  cannot  expect  Boston  to  hold 
him  up  !m 

According  to  long-established  custom,  after  the 
oration  the  members  of  the  city  government  and  the 
invited  guests  repaired  to  Faneuil  Hall,  where  a 
banquet  was  followed  by  a  long  list  of  toasts.  It 
was  significant  of  the  feeling  of  that  day,  that  every 

1  Men  of  very  different  views  agreed  as  to  the  probable  effect  of 
this  oration  upon  Stunner's  future.  "The  crowd  dissolved; 
the  audience  surges  into  the  street.  One  man  goes  up  to  Mayor 
Elliott  [Eliot?]  and  says:  'Mr.  Elliott,  what  do  you  think  of 
the  oration?'  'The  young  man  has  cut  his  throat,  sir  ! '  '' — 
Wendell  Phillips,  in  an  oration  on  Sumner  reported  in  Bos 
ton  Daily  Advertiser,  March  3,  1877.  "  I  suppose  he  has  com 
mitted  a  social  felo  de  se  by  it.  I  look  upon  his  fearless  book 
[this  oration]  as  the  tombstone  of  his  consideration  in  the 
minds  of  nine-tenths  of  this  Infidel  Community." — Letter  of  J. 
R.  Lowell  to  H.  W.  Longfellow,  Aug.  13,  1845,  Lowell's  Letters, 
Vol.  I,  p.  95. 


88  CHAELES  SUMKER 

one  of  the  many  speakers  referred  to  Summer's 
oration  with  "censure,  ridicule,  or  some  kind  of 
criticism."  This  dissent  ran  the  whole  range  from 
the  conservative  and  moderate  qualification  of  the 
historian  Palfrey  and  of  Congressman  E.  C.  Winthrop 
to  coarse  and  personal  abuse  from  a  lawyer  who  had 
long  been  connected  with  the  militia,  and  whose 
remarks  called  forth  loud  applause  from  the  military 
guests.  Sumuer  bore  all  these  criticisms  with  entire 
equanimity,  and  when  given  an  opportunity  to 
reply,  contented  himself  with  a  graceful  compliment 
to  the  choir  of  the  day. 

In  the  mass  of  comment  upon  the  oration,  aside 
from  the  dissent  from  its  main  proposition  that  there 
can  be  no  war  which  is  honorable,  there  was  much 
criticism  upon  two  matters  of  taste  and  propriety. 
To  the  charge  that  his  theme  was  out  of  harmony 
with  the  spirit  of  the  day,  it  may  be  replied  that  he 
spoke  with  the  utmost  earnestness  in  behalf  of  a 
cause  which  he  believed  should  enlist  every  patriot's 
support.  Progress  is  not  advanced  by  the  insistence 
that  every  public  speaker  shall  conform  to  the  views 
which  he  believes  to  be  held  by  the  majority  of  his 
audience.  Sumner  chose  neither  his  theme  nor  the 
manner  of  its  development  with  the  purpose  of 
antagonizing  his  hearers.  For  several  years  in  his 
letters  and  conversation  there  had  frequently  re 
curred  references  to  the  brutality,  the  futility  and 
the  waste  of  war,  which  showed  that  these  were 
thoughts  over  which  he  had  long  been  brooding. 
On  the  other  hand,  there  was  much  of  validity 


" THE  TRUE  GKANDEUR  OF  NATIONS"    89 

iii  the  criticism  that  in  various  parts  of  his  oration 
Simmer  exhibited  little  tact  or  consideration  for  the 
feelings  of  many  of  his  hearers.  To  the  forceful 
presentation  of  his  theme  it  was  by  no  means  neces 
sary  that  he  descend  to  slurring  remarks  upon  the 
dress  and  bearing  of  military  leaders  there  present 
as  highly  honored  guests  of  the  city.1 

In  the  weeks  following  the  delivery  of  this  ora 
tion,  there  poured  in  upon  Sumner  hundreds  of 
letters  from  all  over  the  country,  reflecting  widely 
divergent  opinions.  One  of  the  most  cordial  was 
from  John  A.  Andrew,  the  future  war  governor  of 
Massachusetts,  who  in  closing  expressed  his  "grati 
tude  to  Providence,  that  here,  in  our  city  of  Boston, 
one  has  at  last  stepped  forward  to  consecrate  to 
celestial  hopes  the  day — the  great  day — which 
Americans  have  at  best  heretofore  held  sacred  only 
to  memory.77  Theodore  Parker's  letter  of  hearty 
approval  was  the  beginning  of  a  friendship  and  a 
hearty  cooperation  that  were  to  end  only  with  death. 
In  England  as  well  as  in  America  Sumner's  oration 
attracted  wide  attention,  its  references  to  the  pend 
ing  Oregon  question  giving  it  added  point.  An 

1  It  is  interesting  to  note  a  criticism  which  Sumner  twenty 
years  later  passed  upon  Bancroft's  eulogy  upon  Lincoln.  "I 
felt  at  the  time  that  there  was  something  wrong  in  such  a 
speech  when  the  diplomatic  corps  were  official  guests. 
The  chief  error  was  in  addressing  such  a  speech  to  such  guests. 
Either  they  should  not  have  been  invited,  or  the  speech  should 
have  been  what  could  be  said  in  their  presence  without  giving 
offense."  March  15,  1865.  But  Sumner,  himself,  upon  many  a 
later  occasion  showed  a  strange  insensibility  to  the  pain  which 
his  words  must  inevitably  have  caused  to  hearers  of  normal 
make-op. 


90  CHAKLES  SUMMER 

abridged  edition  of  7,000  copies  was  circulated  by 
the  several  Peace  Societies,  and  four  or  five  editions 
of  the  entire  oration  were  sold. 

To  Sunmer  hardly  less  than  to  his  friends  that 
Fourth  of  July  brought  a  revelation.  It  was  the 
parting  of  the  ways.  Only  a  few  months  before,  the 
shadows  seemed  to  be  settling  thick  about  him. 
He  was  lonely  and  ill  j  he  felt  that  his  life  had  been 
a  failure,  and  wished  that  Death's  summons  might 
have  been  for  him,  instead  of  for  those  who  found 
life  a  blessing.  Now,  at  last,  he  caught  a  glimpse  of 
a  goal.  He  found  that  he  could  sway  thousands  by 
his  eloquence,  and  the  discovery  quickened  all  the 
moral  force  within  him.  Aimlessness  and  depres 
sion  were  flung  aside.  He  would  press  toward  the 
mark. 


CHAPTER  VI 

SUMNER' s  ENLISTMENT  IN  THE  ANTI-SLAVERY 
RANKS 

FROM  that  Fourth  of  July  his  Court  Street  office 
could  never  again  look  the  same  to  him.  It  had 
been  the  scene  of  dull  routine,  of  editorial  hack 
work.  Now  he  had  found  himself.  The  definite 
line  that  his  effort  should  take  was  not  yet  clear, 
but  his  interest  in  the  practice  of  law  and  in  the 
study  of  jurisprudence  fell  into  the  background. 

His  new  aspirations  had  hardly  been  kindled 
when  he  met  with  a  great  sorrow  in  the  death  of 
Judge  Story,  to  whom  he  was  bound  by  the  closest 
ties  of  affection  and  gratitude,  which  found  worthy 
expression  in  his  "Tribute  of  Friendship. "  The 
eminent  jurist  had  repeatedly  declared  that  as  far  as 
his  professorship  was  concerned,  he  should  die  con 
tent  if  Charles  Sumner  were  to  succeed  him.  But 
when  the  vacancy  occurred,  the  position  was  not 
offered  to  Sumner.  Nor  did  he  expect  it.  As  he 
wrote  to  his  brother :  "  I  am  too  much  of  a  re 
former  in  law  to  be  trusted  in  a  post  of  such  com 
manding  influence  as  this  has  now  become."  The 
radicalism  of  his  oration  had  not  been  agreeable 
to  the  members  of  the  corporation.  Sumuer  seems 
to  have  felt  somewhat  hurt  at  the  evidence  that  he 
was  no  longer  held  in  so  high  regard  as  formerly  at 


92  CHARLES  SUMNER 

his  alma  mater  ;  yet  it  is  doubtful  whether  he  would 
have  accepted  the  position,  for  he  felt  that  in  such 
a  professorship  he  would  no  longer  be  a  free  man. 

In  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century,  to  a 
young  man  of  philanthropic  impulses  and  blessed 
with  the  gift  of  tongues,  one  door  opened  wide. 
That  was  the  New  England  Lyceum,  then  in  its 
pristine  vigor.  In  a  way,  it  was  a  precursor  of  the 
university  -  extension  of  a  later  generation.  In 
many  New  England  cities  and  towns  the  Lyceum 
arranged  for  a  course  of  ten  or  a  dozen  lectures. 
The  pay  was  small,  rarely  exceeding  ten  or  fifteen 
dollars,  but  the  opportunity  for  influence  was  great 
and  attractive.  The  audience  was  certain  to  be 
made  up  of  the  most  intelligent  people  of  the  com- 
miinity.  Divisive  subjects,  such  as  slavery,  or  dis 
tinctly  political  topics,  were  tabooed,  but  the  lec 
turer  might  incidentally  get  very  definitely  before 
the  people  his  views  even  upon  such  subjects. 
The  Lyceum  afforded  a  forum  for  the  best  thinkers 
of  the  day.  It  is  creditable  to  the  audiences  that 
among  the  speakers  most  in  demand  were  Emerson, 
Whipple,  Holmes  and  Beecher.  Even  Choate  and 
Webster  did  not  scorn  the  lecture  platform.  For 
the  five  years  following  the  delivery  of  the  "True 
Grandeur  of  Nations,"  no  lecturer  was  more  wel 
come  before  Lyceums  than  Charles  Sumner,  and 
here  it  was,  as  Whipple  said,  that  he  got  a  hold 
upon  "  earnest,  progressive  clergymen  and  warm 
hearted,  cultivated  women, — perhaps  the  two 
strongest  forces  for  the  moral  awakening  of  a  com- 


IN  THE  ANTI-SLAVERY  BANKS         93 

muuity, — such  as  no  other  American  public  man 
has  gained."  Here,  too,  he  aroused  the  enthusi 
asm  of  hundreds  of  young  men  who  ten  years  later 
were  to  translate  his  ideals  into  practical  politics. 

Sunmer's  Lyceum  lectures  were  mostly  upon 
three  topics:  "  The  Employment  of  Time/' 
"  White  Slavery  in  the  Barbary  States,'7  and  "  The 
Law  of  Human  Progress."  The  second  of  these 
themes  was  obviously  chosen  to  afford  an  opportu 
nity  to  set  forth  by  indirection  the  cruelties  of 
American  slavery.  Printed  in  a  small  volume  with 
abundant  woodcuts,  it  had  a  wide  circulation. 

A  year  after  Simmer  first  challenged  attention  as 
an  orator,  he  was  invited  to  deliver  the  oration  be 
fore  the  Phi  Beta  Kappa  Society  of  Harvard,  an 
occasion  and  an  audience  which  have  called  forth 
their  best  from  some  of  America's  most  eminent 
men.  Upon  the  platform  were  Edward  Everett, 
who  had  just  been  made  president  of  the  university, 
and  Josiah  Quiucy,  his  predecessor  in  that  office ; 
John  Quincy  Adams,  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  William 
Kent,  who  had  recently  been  appointed  to  Story's 
professorship ;  and  the  Governor  of  Virginia. 
Dr.  Edward  Everett  Hale  tells  of  the  profound  im 
pression  which  Sumner  made  upon  young  men  like 
himself.  His  spendid  presence  dominated  the  au 
dience.  It  had  been  the  custom  of  speakers  upon 
this  solemn  occasion  to  appear  in  the  traditional 
black  gown  of  the  New  England  pulpit,  but 
Sumner,  in  addressing  a  company  of  scholars,  chose 
to  appear  before  them  not  in  the  garb  of  a  scholar 


94  CHAELES  SUMNER 

of  1631  but  of  the  gentleman  of  1846.  Accordingly 
he  stood  forth  in  blue  dress-coat  with  brass  buttons, 
a  buff  waistcoat,  white  trousers  and  gaiters.  And 
his  manner  was  equally  unconventional  ;  some  of 
his  hearers  were  quite  aghast  at  seeing  him  in  the 
fervor  of  his  discourse  turn  his  back  upon  his 
audience  for  several  minutes  while  he  addressed 
President  Everett.  Within  a  few  mouths,  four  of 
the  most  eminent  sons  of  Harvard  had  died.  They 
had  all  been  personal  friends  of  Sumiier,  from  whom 
he  had  gained  much  inspiration.  It  was  therefore 
a  congenial  task  which  he  essayed  in  commemora 
ting  these  men  in  an  oration  upon  the  theme  :  l  i  The 
Scholar  (John  Pickering) ;  the  Jurist  (Joseph 
Story)  ;  the  Artist  (Washington  Allston)  ;  and  the 
Philanthropist  (William  E.  Charming)."  Many 
of  his  audience  had  been  prejudiced  against  him  as 
a  theorist  and  radical,  but  he  won  their  cordial  sym 
pathy  and  for  more  than  two  hours  he  held  their 
rapt  attention.  The  impression  upon  high-minded 
young  men  who  heard  him  was  one  never  to  be 
effaced.  The  oration's  deepest  notes  were  struck 
in  the  passages  which  attacked  slavery  and  war. 
Sumner  later  acknowledged  that  "  in  the  sensitive 
condition  of  public  sentiment  at  that  time,  such  an 
effort  would  have  found  small  indulgence  if  he  had 
not  placed  himself  behind  four  such  names.  While 
commemorating  the  dead,  he  was  able  to  uphold 
living  truth. " 

In  the  chorus  of  acclaim  which  greeted  this  ad 
dress,  no  words  were  more  discerning  than  those  of 


IN  THE  ANTI  SLAVEKY  KANKS          95 

the  venerable  John  Quincy  Adanis,  who  wrote  to 
Surnuer :  u  Casting  my  eyes  backward  no  farther 
than  the  4th  of  July  of  last  year,  when  you  set  all  the 
vipers  of  Alecto  a- hissing  by  proclaiming  the  Chris 
tian  law  of  universal  peace  and  love,  and  then  cast 
ing  them  forward  perhaps  not  much  farther,  but  be 
yond  my  own  allotted  time,  I  see  you  have  a  mission 
to  perform.  I  look  from  Pisgah  to  the  Promised 
Laud  ;  you  must  enter  upon  it.  ...  To  the 
motto  upon  my  seal  (Alteri  sceculo)  add  Delenda  est 
servitus. ' ' 

In  the  next  year  or  two,  Sumner  spoke  with  great 
acceptance  as  the  commencement  orator  at  Arnherst 
College  and  Brown  University  upon  "  Fame  and 
Glory,"  and  at  Union  College  upon  ' '  The  Law  of  Hu 
man  Progress. "  It  is  to  be  remembered  that  in  these 
years  the  Mexican  War,  fought  for  the  extension 
of  slavery,  was  the  subject  most  in  men's  minds,  and 
Sumner7  s  uncompromising  treatment  of  these  timely 
topics  became  a  potent  force  in  shaping  public  sen 
timent.  It  was  inevitable  that  the  author  of  "  The 
True  Grandeur  of  Nations"  should  be  drafted  into 
the  service  of  the  Peace  Movement.  In  1849  he  de 
livered  the  annual  address  before  the  American 
Peace  Society,  discussing  u  the  abolishment  of  the 
institution  of  war,  and  of  the  whole  system  as  an  es 
tablished  arbiter  of  justice  in  the  Commonwealth  of 
Nations."  Bead  at  the  present  day,  Sumner' s  plea 
for  "  a  Congress  of  Nations,  with  a  high  court  of 
j  udicature,  or  arbitration  established  by  treaties  be 
tween  nations"  seems  prophetic  of  things  which 


96  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

were  to  come  half  a  century  later,  and  of  hopes  even 
yet  deferred.  This  address  called  out  warm  com 
mendations  from  men  with  whom  he  was  later  to  be 
closely  associated, — among  others,  Palfrey  and 
Seward.  Although  his  activity  in  the  Peace  Society 
ended  in  the  following  year,  Sumner's  interest  in 
this  movement  continued  unabated.  In  the  Senate 
he  was  the  frequent  champion  of  arbitration  ;  and 
in  his  will  he  left  to  Harvard  College  $1,000  in  trust 
for  an  annual  prize  for  the  best  dissertation  by  any 
student  on  "  Universal  Peace,  and  the  methods  by 
which  war  may  be  permanently  superseded. " 

In  this  period,  1845-47,  Sumner  was  drawn  into  a 
controversy  which  could  hardly  have  arisen  in  any 
other  city  in  the  world.  For  twenty  years  there  had 
been  in  existence  the  Boston  Prison  Discipline  So 
ciety,  with  a  membership  made  up  of  some  of  Bos 
ton's  most  aristocratic  and  philanthropic  citizens. 
The  principal  question  then  at  issue  concerned  the 
merits  of  the  separate  (Pennsylvania)  system  as 
contrasted  with  the  congregate  (Auburn)  system. 
The  officers  of  the  Boston  society  favored  the  latter, 
and  at  the  annual  meeting,  in  the  Park  Street 
Church,  in  1845,  the  perfunctory  reading  of  the  sec 
retary's  report  was  followed  by  a  motion  for  its  ac 
ceptance  made  by  a  prominent  lawyer,  who  strongly 
condemned  the  Pennsylvania  system.  At  that  in 
stant  the  dull  monotony  of  the  meeting  came  to  an 
end,  for  near  the  front  of  the  auditorium  there  rose 
a  tall  young  man,  in  close- buttoned  blue  frock-coat, 
Mounting  upon  the  rail  of  his  pew,  he  passed  rapidly 


IN  THE  ANTI-SLAVERY  EANKS         97 

from  pew  to  pew  until  he  stood  upon  the  platform, 
where  with  but  scant  courtesy  to  the  chairman  he 
pluuged  into  a  scathing  arraignment  of  the  report, 
which  he  continued  to  assail  for  half  an  hour.  Said 
an  eye  witness  :  "  It  was  like  the  descent  of  some 
unknown  and  unexpected  god  from  Olympus. 
There  was  auger  and  fear  and  impatience  on  the 
platform  ;  but  the  congregation  was  with  the 
speaker.  He  came  like  a  breeze  on  a  calm,  dull 
day  at  sea." 

Sunnier  was  urged  to  make  this  protest  by  Dr. 
Howe,  whose  peuological  studies  had  led  him  to  be 
lieve  that  the  Society  was  doing  gross  injustice  to 
the  Pennsylvania  system.  Sumuer's  unwelcome  in 
terruption  resulted  in  the  appointment  of  a  committee 
of  investigation.  The  next  year,  and  again  the  year 
following,  the  controversy  was  renewed.  Its  subject 
is  too  remote  from  present  interest  to  make  the  men 
tion  of  its  incidents  profitable  ;  but  at  the  time  it 
stirred  the  city  profoundly.  In  1847  on  eight  hot 
evenings  in  May  and  June  Tremont  Temple  was 
thronged  with  eager  listeners  to  these  debates,  last 
ing  till  almost  midnight.  The  chief  attraction  had 
come  to  be  less  the  penological  question  at  issue  than 
the  dauntless  and  unwearied  champion  who  had 
entered  the  arena  against  the  management  of  the  So 
ciety  and  its  rich  and  conservative  supporters.  Al 
though  time  seems  to  have  given  judgment  against 
the  Pennsylvania  system,  all  Sumuer's  moral  en 
thusiasm  was  then  aroused  in  what  he  believed  was 
a  battle  for  justice.  In  these  debates  he  gained  im- 


98  CHAELES  BTJMKEB 

mensely  in  self-control  and  in  adroitness  in  dealing 
with  opponents.  One  unfortunate  result  was  that 
in  the  heat  of  his  onslaught  he  little  heeded  the 
weight  of  his  weapons,  and,  as  many  a  time  in  later 
life,  his  words  left  wounds  that  never  ceased  to 
rankle,  although  he  was  quite  unconscious  of  giving 
personal  offense.  An  officer  of  the  Society,  who 
bore  the  brunt  of  the  defense,  was  a  man  of  the 
highest  connections  both  by  blood  and  by  marriage 
in  exclusive  Boston  society,  and  cold  glances  and 
curt  greetings  soon  began  to  show  Sumner  how  this 
"  Boston"  could  resent  what  it  deemed  an  affront. 
Suinuer  had  reached  the  parting  of  the  ways.  He 
had  become  an  orator  of  high  rank,  but  a  career  of 
any  unity  or  stable  effectiveness  seemed  far  off. 
Moreover,  he  had  aroused  distrust  if  not  aversion  by 
his  growing  radicalism  in  American  politics  and  by 
his  avowed  sympathy  with  ultra- democratic  move 
ments  abroad,  and  also  by  the  personalities  which 
he  had  directed  against  some  of  Boston's  most  rep 
resentative  men.  What  was  his  future  to  be? 
Should  he  curb  the  impulses  of  the  radical  and  re 
former  and  conform  himself  to  the  standards  of  the 
conservative  and  cultivated  society  that  had  shown 
him  warm  hospitality  upon  his  return  from  Europe  f 
Hillard  was  making  concessions  which  kept  those 
doors  open  with  friendly  welcome  for  him  ;  and 
few  men  have  been  more  susceptible  to  the  charm  of 
luxurious  surroundings  and  of  cultivated  society 
than  was  Charles  Sumner.  Or  should  he  put  his 
enthusiasm  and  eloquence  without  restraint  at  the 


IN  THE  ANTI  SLAVERY  BANKS         99 

service  of  freedom  and  peace,  and  become  a  prophet 
of  revolt  ?  The  decision  was  hardly  left  to  Sumuer. 
The  call  of  the  times  determined  the  answer. 

In  no  other  state  had  the  project  to  increase  the 
power  of  slavery  by  the  annexation  of  Texas  aroused 
more  opposition  and  resentment  than  in  Massachu 
setts.  The  spirit  of  the  Puritans  breathed  in  the 
address  prepared  by  Webster,  Charles  Allen  and 
S.  C.  Phillips,  for  the  convention  which  assembled 
in  Faneuil  Hall,  January  29,  1845,  to  voice  the  Bay 
State's  sentiment: — "  Massachusetts  denounces  the 
iniquitous  project  in  its  inception,  and  in  every 
stage  of  its  progress  ;  in  its  means  and  its  end,  and 
in  all  its  purposes  and  pretenses  of  its  authors." 
Yet  not  a  few  of  the  most  influential  Whigs  held 
aloof  from  this  protest,  and  when,  a  few  weeks  later, 
annexation  became  an  accomplished  fact,  the  Whig 
leaders  as  well  as  conservative  business  men  showed 
a  disposition  to  acquiesce  and  to  try  to  focus  atten 
tion  upon  the  tariff  as  the  chief  issue  between  parties. 

But  it  was  clear  that  Southern  leaders  were  aim 
ing  at  the  admission  of  Texas,  that  its  influence 
might  restore  the  balance  in  the  Senate.  Against 
this  next  step,  all  those  Whigs  whose  opposition  to 
slavery  was  a  matter  of  principle  joined  in  vigorous 
revolt.  American  party  politics  had  seemed  to 
Sumner  sordid  and  repulsive,  but  now  when  the 
"  Conscience  Whigs"  were  brought  together  by 
their  horror  of  the  Texas  "  conspiracy,"  he  did  not 
hesitate  as  to  where  he  should  stand. 

From  his  earliest  boyhood  Sumner' s  associations 


100  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

had  predisposed  him  against  slavery.  His  father 
was  a  man  of  deep  convictions  as  to  the  evil  of  the 
institution  and  outspoken  in  asserting  the  equal 
rights  of  men  of  every  race.  Sumuer's  first  contact 
with  slavery  was  in  1834.  He  had  been  brought  up 
in  Boston,  had  received  the  best  that  Harvard  Col 
lege  could  give,  had  finished  his  studies  in  the  law 
school  with  distinguished  credit,  and  was  now  mak 
ing  a  leisurely  trip  to  Washington.  To  his  father 
he  wrote  :  "  The  whole  country  [between  Baltimore 
and  Washington]  was  barren  and  cheerless.  .  .  . 
For  the  first  time  I  saw  slaves,  and  my  worst  pre 
conception  of  their  appearance  and  ignorance  did 
not  fall  as  low  as  their  actual  stupidity.  They  ap 
pear  to  be  nothing  more  than  moving  masses  of  flesh, 
unendowed  with  anything  of  intelligence  above  the 
brutes.  I  have  now  an  idea  of  the  blight  upon  that 
part  of  our  country  in  which  they  live."  l 

It  must  be  confessed  that  from  this  it  would  seem 
that  the  sight  of  men  and  women  in  bondage  aroused 
little  heat  in  the  blood  of  this  young  Boston  student. 
His  aesthetic  sensibilities  were  offended  rather  than 
his  human  sympathy  kindled.  The  cause  of  the 
slave  at  first  appealed  to  his  head  rather  than  to  his 
heart.  Nevertheless,  the  Liberator  was  the  first 
paper  to  which  he  ever  subscribed,  and  as  early  as 
1836  he  was  raising  the  question  with  Lieber,  then 
residing  in  South  Carolina,  whether  emancipation 
were  not  practicable,  and  marveling  that  Lieber 
could  endure  the  bondage  of  opinion  at  the  South. 
1  February  24,  1834. 


IN  THE  ANTI  SLAVEKY  RANKS        101 

While  iii  Europe  Sumuer  discussed  the  subject  with 
Sismoudi,  whom  he  found  "  a  thorough  Abolition 
ist,  and  astonished  that  our  country  will  not  take  a 
lesson  from  the  ample  page  of  history  and  eradicate 
slavery."  It  was  a  gratification  to  Suinner's  hered 
itary  sentiment  of  race-equality  to  find  at  the  Con 
vent  of  Palazzuola  ll  a  native  of  Abyssinia,  mingling 
in  delightful  and  affectionate  familiarity  with  the 
Franciscan  friars,  whose  visitor  and  scholar  he  wras." 
And  among  the  listeners  at  lectures  in  the  Ecole  de 
Droit  he  was  glad  to  see  two  or  three  blacks,  or 
rather  inulattoes, — two-thirds  black,  perhaps, — 
dressed  quite  a  la  mode,  and  having  the  easy,  jaunty 
air  of  young  men  of  fashion,  who  were  well  received 
by  their  fellow  students.  .  .  .  Their  color  seemed 
to  be  no  objection  to  them.  I  was  glad  to  see  this  ; 
though  with  American  impressions,  it  seemed  very 
strange.  It  must  be,  then,  that  the  distinction  be 
tween  free  blacks  and  whites  among  us  is  derived 
from  education,  and  does  not  exist  in  the  nature  of 
things."  Surnner  showed  his  own  sentiments  as  to 
race  equality  by  canceling — as  did  Emerson — an  en 
gagement  before  a  Lyceum  which  had  adopted  a 
rule  for  the  exclusion  of  colored  persons  from  their 
lectures, — a  rule  which  his  protest  caused  to  be  re 
scinded. 

Upon  his  return  to  America,  his  first  contact  with 
slavery  issues  was  in  the  question  as  to  the  right  of 
inquiry  to  determine  the  nature  of  a  suspected  slaver 
on  the  high  seas,  and  in  the  Creole  case.  In  both 
instances  his  writings  were  those  of  a  jurist,  but  in 


102  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

the  Creole  controversy  his  human  sympathies  are 
frankly  avowed.  He  collaborated  with  Dr.  Chaii- 
niug  in  his  stern  arraignment  of  Webster's  letter 
upon  this  case.  In  Stunner's  correspondence  his 
opposition  to  slavery  takes  on  a  note  of  greater 
severity  and  there  appear  in  germ  some  of  the  doc 
trines  which  he  was  to  develop  later  : — his  conten 
tion,  for  example,  that  slavery  was  purely  a  local 
institution,  drawing  its  vitality  from  state  laws  j 
and  his  insistence  that  "the  great  moral  blockade, 
with  which  the  South  was  to  be  surrounded,  be 
strengthened  and  more  firmly  established."  He  in 
dignantly  repudiated  the  notion  that  because  North 
ern  opponents  of  slavery  were  debarred  from  inter 
fering  politically  with  the  evil  in  the  states  where  it 
existed,  they  were  called  upon  to  suppress  their 
sympathy  with  the  slave  and  their  detestation  of  the 
system  of  which  he  was  a  victim.  Suuiner  held  that 
slavery  was  a  national  evil,  for  which  to  a  large  ex 
tent  the  nation  and  all  its  parts  were  responsible, 
and  which  to  a  large  extent  the  nation  might  re 
move.  He  was  greatly  aroused  by  the  rendition  of 
several  slaves  from  Boston.  To  Longfellow,  then  in 
Europe,  he  appealed  to  send  home  some  poems  on 
slavery, — "  some  stirring  words  that  shall  move  the 
whole  land"  ;  Whittier,  too,  he  urged  to  attack  the 
evil.  "The  literature  of  the  world,"  he  wrote,  "is 
turning  against  slavery.  We  shall  soon  have  it  in 
a  state  of  moral  blockade." 

Sumner  always  insisted  that  he  was  "a  Unionist 
and  a  Constitutionalist "  ;  the  aggression  of  the  South 


IN  THE  ANTI-SLAVERY  KANKS        103 

brought  hint  into  the  political  arena.  He  denounced 
the  attempt  to  annex  Texas  as  "infamous,"  involv 
ing  a  violation  of  the  Constitution  and  the  laws  of 
nations,  and  the  principles  of  good  morals  and  fel 
lowship.  Not  until  the  question  of  the  admission 
of  Texas  as  a  slaveholdiug  state  arose  had  Sumner 
ever  spoken  at  a  political  meeting  or  sought  to  ex 
press  in  public  his  opposition  to  slavery ;  he  had 
had  no  relish  for  politics,  and  he  had  too  much  rev 
erence  for  the  Constitution  to  ally  himself  with  Gar- 
risonian  Abolitionists.  But  from  the  hour  when  in 
Faneuil  Hall  he  stood  forth  to  oppose  the  admission 
of  the  new  slave  state,  he  never  turned  back.  His 
aim,  as  he  declared  to  Cobden,  a  little  later,  was  "  to 
see  slavery  abolished  everywhere  within  the  sphere 
of  the  national  government,  — which  is  in  the  District 
of  Columbia,  on  the  high  seas,  and  in  the  domestic 
slave  trade ;  and  beyond  this,  to  have  this  govern 
ment  for  freedom,  so  far  as  it  can  exert  an  influence, 
and  not  for  slavery." 

To  the  "  Conscience  Whigs  "  of  Massachusetts  the 
admission  of  Texas  only  emphasized  the  need  of 
more  vigorous  resistance  for  the  future.  At  that 
time  the  Boston  Whig  press  was  far  less  sensitive 
to  the  evils  of  slavery  than  to  suggestions  from  those 
identified  with  manufacturing  interests  that  no 
division  must  be  occasioned  in  Whig  ranks.  Find 
ing  editors  unwilling  to  allow  them  any  wide  freedom 
of  expression,  Palfrey,  Adams,  Sumner,  S.  C.  Phil 
lips  and  Wilson  bought  a  struggling  newspaper,  and 
in  the  summer  of  1846  the  Daily  Whig  was  launched 


104  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

with  Charles  Francis  Adams  as  its  editor  and  Charles 
Sumner  as  a  frequent  contributor. 

The  logical  sequel  of  the  annexation  of  Texas  was 
the  war  with  Mexico.  In  the  two  houses  of  Con 
gress,  only  sixteen  men  had  the  honesty  and  courage 
to  vote  against  the  war  appropriation  bill,  which 
supporters  of  the  administration  had  had  the  ef 
frontery  to  preface  by  the  declaration,  l '  By  the  act 
of  the  Eepublic  of  Mexico  a  state  of  war  exists 
between  that  government  and  the  United  States." 
The  disgrace  of  the  Whig  party  was  the  greater 
since  it  is  clear  that  the  war  measure  would  have 
been  passed  without  their  votes,  reluctantly  given, 
doubtless  from  the  fear  that  a  failure  to  support  the 
army  at  the  front  would  react  heavily  a  gainst  them,  as 
against  the  Federalists  in  1812,  and  injure  their  pros 
pects  in  the  approaching  election.  Massachusetts 
sentiment  was  pronounced  against  the  war  bill,  and 
all  her  Whig  members  but  two  voted  against  it. 
Both  of  these  were  from  the  eastern  part  of  the  state, 
and  the  dominant  one  was  Eobert  C.  Winthrop. 

Winthrop  was  a  man  after  Boston's  own  heart. 
In  a  community  where  pride  of  birth  counted  for 
much,  he  was  the  head  of  the  family  most  dis 
tinguished  from  the  earliest  colonial  days.  He1  had 
ample  means,  and  from  his  studies  he  had  gone 
directly  into  public  life.  In  his  twenties  he  had 
been  speaker  of  the  Massachusetts  House  of  Eepre- 
sentatives,  and  at  thirty  he  had  been  sent  to  Con 
gress,  where  he  had  served  with  distinction  and  to 
the  entire  satisfaction  of  his  aristocratic  and  con- 


IN  THE  ANTI-SLAVEKY  BANKS       105 

servative  constituency.  He  was  a  polished  gentle 
man  and  an  orator  of  high  rank.  In  debate  he  was 
said  to  be  the  peer  of  any  member  of  the  House. 

He  offered  no  explanation  of  his  vote  in  favor  of 
the  war  measure,  and  until  midsummer  the  Whig 
press  of  Boston  made  hardly  any  reference  to  this 
break  in  the  Bay  State  delegation.  In  July, 
however,  Adams  came  out  in  the  Whig  with  a 
severe  criticism  of  Winthrop's  vote  as  a  "  positive 
sanction  of  the  acts  of  the  administration,"  and 
raised  the  question  whether  he  had  not  thereby 
"set  his  name  in  perpetual  attestation  of  a  false 
hood."  Friendly  editors  hurried  to  Winthrop's 
defense,  urging  that  the  situation  was  a  complicated 
one,  and  that,  in  supporting  the  measure  for  the 
national  defense,  his  vote  did  not  necessarily  imply 
approval  of  its  preamble.  It  was  at  this  stage  that 
Sumner  took  a  hand  in  the  controversy, — not  will 
ingly,  for  he  had  had  friendly  personal  relations 
with  Winthrop  and  cordially  approved  most  things 
in  his  public  career.  But  at  the  urging  of  Adams 
and  others  he  published  a  letter,  signed  "Boston," 
in  which  he  denied  the  right  of  a  representative  to 
put  his  name  to  a  legislative  lie.  In  a  second  letter, 
he  insisted  that  the  bill,  which  comprised  at  once  a 
virtual  declaration  of  war  and  a  false  statement  as 
to  its  origin,  ought  to  have  been  opposed  by  the 
entire  delegation  ;  yet  he  again  took  occasion  to  ex 
press  his  high  regard  for  Winthrop's  character  and 
public  service.  Sumner  then  wrote  a  note  to  Win 
throp,  frankly  avowing  himself  the  author  of  these 


106  CHARLES  STJMNEB 

two  letters.  In  his  reply  Winthrop  showed  that  he 
was  smarting  under  what  he  deemed  unjust  censure, 
but  expressed  the  hope  that  circumstances  might 
occur  which  would  enable  them  to  restore  their 
pleasant  relations  without  loss  of  self-respect  on 
either  side.  Sumner  responded  with  a  personal 
letter,  which  explained  how  reluctantly  he  had  be 
come  Winthrop's  critic,  but  insisted  that  a  congress 
man's  vote  was  public  property,  and  that  it  was  the 
duty  of  one  who  felt  as  he  did  upon  that  vote  to  de 
nounce  it  distinctly,  unequivocally,  and  publicly. 
He  closed  with  the  words:  "I  hope,  my  dear  sir, 
that  we  may  always  meet  as  friends.  It  will  not  be 
easy  for  me  to  proceed  into  any  other  relation." 
Nevertheless,  only  three  days  later,  Sumner  pub 
lished  a  third  article  on  "  Mr.  Winthrop's  Vote  on 
the  War  Bill,"  more  rhetorical  and  denunciatory 
than  the  two  earlier  ones.  He  asserted  that  Win 
throp  by  that  vote  had  "  given  his  sanction  to  all 
the  desolation  and  bloodshed  of  the  war.  .  .  . 
Surely  this  is  no  common  act.  It  cannot  be  forgotten 
on  earth  ;  it  must  be  remembered  in  heaven.  Blood  ! 
blood  !  is  on  the  hands  of  the  representative  from 
Boston.  Not  all  great  Neptune's  ocean  can  wash 
them  clean  I"1  To  Winthrop  this  letter  seemed  ' '  full 
of  insinuations  as  to  his  motives  and  imputations  on 

^n  an  open  letter  to  Winthrop,  two  months  later,  Sumner 
reiterated  and  heightened  these  charges:  "  Through  you,  they 
[the  people  of  Boston]  are  made  to  declare  unjust  and  cowardly 
war,  with  superadded  falsehood,  in  the  cause  of  slavery."  This 
guilt  "  incarnadines  the  halls  of  Congress;  nay,  more,  through 
you  it  reddens  the  hands  of  your  constituents  in  Boston." 


IN  THE  ANTI-SLAVERY  BANKS        107 

his  integrity,"  and  lie  declined  further  social  rela 
tions  with  a  man  who  had  thus  arraigned  him, 
adding,  "My  hand  is  not  at  the  service  of  any  man 
who  has  denounced  it  with  such  ferocity,  as  being 
stained  with  blood." 

This  incident  has  been  narratedjwith  some  fulness  J 
for  two  reasons.  In  the  first  place,  it  affords  an 
excellent  illustration  of  certain  peculiarities  of 
Sumner's  mind  and  habit.  He  rarely  spoke  ex 
temporaneously  or  wrote  hastily.  Whatever  he 
said  or  published  had  been  carefully  elaborated  in 
the  quiet  of  his  study.  He  was  not  a  rhetorician  in 
the  sense  that  he  sought  to  make  the  worse  appear 
the  better  reason,  but  when  once  he  became  con 
vinced  that  a  man  or  an  act  ought  to  be  denounced, 
he  gave  himself  up  to  the  task  with  an  abandon  like 
that  of  the  writer  of  the  imprecatory  Psalms.  His 
sense  of  proportion  gave  way  under  the  orator's  im 
pulse  aud  he  would  repeat  and  heighten  his  charges 
with  a  nagging  persistence  often  more  exasperating 
than  the  substance  of  the  arraignment.  He  also 
remained  strangely  obtuse  to  the  pain  which  his 
words  were  causing^ Looked  at  from  a  distance  of 
threescore  years,  th4  nistorian  does  not  hesitate  to 
pronounce  Wiuthrop's  vote  a  serious  mistake ; 
though,  in  view  of  all  the  facts,  he  cannot  doubt 
that  in  the  perplexity  of  the  case,  the  vote  was 
honestly  and  conscientiously  given.  Yet  in  public 
print,  Sumner,  in  a  fierce  crescendo  of  denunciation, 
could  accuse  Winthrop  of  sanctioning  "  unquestion 
ably  the  most  wicked  act  in  our  history," — and  at  the 


108  CHAELES  SUMNEK 

same  time  he  could  expect  to  continue  with  him  upon 
terms  of  personal  friendship. 

The  other  point  of  most  importance  in  connection 
with  this  controversy  is  its  social  and  political 
effects  upon  Sumner.  His  attacks  upon  Winthrop 
created  a  deep  and  lasting  bitterness  toward  himy 
on  the  part  of  Winthrop' s  friends.  He  was  the 
idol  of  Boston's  best  society.  From  this  time, 
houses  where  Sumner  had  been  a  frequent  and  wel 
come  visitor  were  closed  to  him.1  When  a  guest  at  a 
party  given  by  Mr.  Ticknor  asked  if  Mr.  Sumner 
were  to  be  present,  that  social  autocrat  replied : 
"He  is  outside  the  pale  of  society."  This  ostra 
cism  was  imposed  upon  others  who  refused  to  banish 
slavery  to  the  background  of  politics.  Even  Adams, 
despite  his  family  history,  was  not  exempt,  while 
Palfrey  and  Dana  and  many  another  met  with  slights 
and  rebuffs  from  those  who  had  hitherto  seemed 
warm  friends.  This  ostracism  brought  to  Sumner 
a  keener  hurt  than  to  other  anti -slavery  leaders,  for 
he  had  no  hearth  of  his  own,  and  the  hospitalities 
of  these  beautiful  Boston  homes  had  been  a  solace 
and  a  delight.  "It  is  the  opposition  to  Winthrop 
that  aroused  personal  feelings'agaiiist  me,"  he  wrote 
to  his  brother.  "  It  has  cost  me  friendships  which 
I  valued  much."  But  he  had  no  thought  of  barter 
ing  his  manhood  to  retain  them. 

'Sumner once  told  Phillips  :  "  Never  after  that  act  [his  espous 
ing  the  anti-slavery  cause]  did  I  receive  a  single  invitation  ex 
cept  from  Longfellow  at  Cambridge  and  Prescott  in  Boston." 
Of  course  this  ostracism  came  to  an  end  before  his  last  years. 
— Phillips,  as  reported  in  Boston  Daily  Advertiser,  March  13, 1877. 


IN  THE  ANTI-SLAVEEY  EANKS       109 

In  the  fall  of  1846  Simmer  attended  his  first 
caucus  and  began  to  take  an  active  hand  in  party 
politics.  In  the  Whig  convention  the  managers 
had  planned  to  have  Winthrop  make  a  speech 
"  giving  the  key-note  "  ;  but  urgent  calls  arose  for 
Suinner,  and  he  took  the  platform  and  made  an 
earnest  plea  that  the  party  then  and  there,  in 
Faneuil  Hall,  "vow  perpetual  allegiance  to  the 
right  and  perpetual  hostility  to  slavery. "  l  He 
pledged  his  adherence  to  constitutional  methods, 
but  affirmed  that  the  Constitution  might  and  should 
be  amended  so  as  to  make  possible  more  aggressive 
action  against  slavery.  Winthrop' s  speech  em 
phasized  other  issues,  particularly  the  tariff,  and 
its  obvious  intent  was  to  arrest  any  tendency  to 
ward  committing  the  party  to  a  definite  anti-slavery 
policy.  Then  followed  the  consideration  of  resolu 
tions  proposed  by  the  "Commercial  Whigs"  and 
of  another  series  clearly  voicing  the  sentiments  of 
the  "Conscience  Whigs."  Excitement  grew  in 
tense.  It  seemed  likely  that  the  anti-slavery  resolu 
tions  would  be  adopted,  when,  after  hurried  consulta 
tion  with  other  leaders,  Lawrence  went  out  and 
returned  escorting  Daniel  Webster.  The  effect  was 
electric.  Delegates  parted  to  right  and  left,  opening 
a  path,  as  that  majestic  presence  advanced  to  the 

1 "  Sumner  besought  Webster  to  heed  the  changing  aspects  of 
the  time,  and  add  to  his  great  title,  Defender  of  the  Constitution, 
the  greater  name,  Defender  of  Humanity.  Alas  !  it  was  de 
manding  dawn  of  the  sunset !  It  was  beseeching  yesterday  to 
return  to-morrow  !  It  was  imploring  Webster  to  be  Charles 
Sumner  !  "—  G.  W.  Curtis,  Orations,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  228. 


110  CHARLES  SUMNEK 

front  of  the  hall.  Not  a  word  did  he  say  ;  yet 
his  coming  instantly  started  crystallization  among 
the  turbulent  elements.  In  spite  of  earnest  plead 
ing  from  Charles  Allen,  the  Young  Whigs'  amend 
ment  was  doomed.  No  sooner  were  the  slated 
resolutions  passed  than  Webster  addressed  the  con 
vention,  closing  with  the  impressive  words  :  * k  For 
my  part,  in  the  dark  and  troubled  night  that  is 
upon  us,  I  see  no  star  above  the  horizon  promising 
light  to  guide  us  but  the  intelligent,  patriotic,  united 
Whig  party  of  the  United  States." 

In  a  review  of  the  proceedings  of  the  convention, 
Sumner  charged  that  it  had  been  dominated  by 
those  who  regarded  the  tariff  as  a  higher  principle 
of  union  than  love  of  freedom.  One  editor  after  an 
other  declined  to  print  this,  either  because  it  would 
alienate  proprietors  and  advertisers,  or  on  the 
ground  that  it  would  widen  dissensions  within  the 
party ;  but  Adams  brought  it  out  in  the  Whiff. 
Sumner' s  next  activity  was  in  connection  with  a 
Faneuil  Hall  meeting  to  voice  indignation  at  the 
recent  abduction  of  a  fugitive  slave,  which  had 
been  carried  out  in  contempt  of  the  laws  of  the 
commonwealth.  At  the  solicitation  of  Sumner  and 
Howe,  John  Quincy  Adams  consented  to  preside 
over  the  meeting.  It  was  the  last  time  he  was  to 
appear  before  a  public  assemblage  in  Massachusetts. 
But  neither  the  presence  of  the  commonwealth's 
first  citizen  nor  the  addresses  of  Sumner,  Phillips, 
Parker  and  other  eloquent  speakers  could  give 
respectability  to  such  a  gathering  in  the  view  of 


LNT  THE  ASTI-SLAVERY  RANKS        111 

Boston's  leading  merchants  and  manufacturers. 
They  were  conspicuous  by  their  absence.  The 
meeting  received  scant  notice  in  the  newspapers, 
and  most  of  them  referred  to  it  in  terms  of  censure. 
At  the  time  when  the  Whiff  began  its  outspoken 
criticism  of  Winthrop  for  his  vote  upon  the  Mex 
ican  War  measure,  I  here  was  no  thought  of  or 
ganizing  opposition  to  his  return  to  Congress ;  but 
as  the  election  drew  near,  the  anti-slavery  leaders 
became  convinced  that  it  would  be  wise,  since  the 
issue  had  been  made  so  sharp,  to  place  another  can 
didate  in  the  field,  not  with  any  expectation  of 
electing  him,  but  in  order  to  furnish  a  rallying  point 
for  moral  sentiment.  Suinner  was  the  logical  selec 
tion.  It  was  he  who  had  forced  the  issue  to  the 
front.  At  the  time  of  the  meeting  to  put  a  candi 
date  in  nomination,  Sumner  was  in  Maine.  The 
mention  of  his  name  was  greeted  with  tremendous 
applause,  and  his  service  seemed  so  essential  to  the 
strengthening  of  the  movement  that  in  spite  of  his 
repeated  refusal  to  allow  consideration  of  his  name, 
he  was  forthwith  nominated.  But  Sumner  felt  a  re 
pugnance  not  only  to  office-holding  in  general,  but 
to  this  office  in  particular,  last  his  criticism  of  Win 
throp' s  course  should  be  suspected  to  have  sprung 
from  an  ambition  to  succeed  him.  Although  many 
of  his  friends  thought  him  oversensitive  to  any 
charge  of  place- seeking,  he  could  not  be  swerved 
from  his  purpose,  and  positively  declined  to  stand 
for  election.  Dr.  Howe's  name  was  substituted. 
In  the  meeting  in  his  support  Sumner  made  most  ef- 


112  CHARLES  SUMNEK 

fective  use  of  an  historical  parallel  :  he  recalled  how 
Chatham,  Burke  aud  Fox  had  been  unceasing  in 
their  denunciation  of  what  they  deemed  an  unjust 
war,  and  insisted  that  in  America  at  that  moment 
the  higher  patriotism  demanded  the  instant  with 
drawal  of  our  troops  from  Mexico.  The  result  of 
the  campaign  was  at  no  time  in  doubt.  Winthrop 
was  elected,  Howe's  supporters  having  made  but 
small  inroads  upon  the  normal  Whig  vote  in  sup 
port  of  a  regular  nominee  of  such  eminence.  But 
Massachusetts'  attitude  was,  in  a  way,  authorita 
tively  reversed  a  few  weeks  later  when  the  legisla 
ture,  by  a  vote  of  nearly  two  to  one,  adopted  a 
series  of  resolutions  (which  Sumner  had  drafted  for  a 
legislative  committee)  in  connection  with  a  report 
upon  the  Mexican  War.  These  denounced  the  war 
in  unmeasured  terms,  and  called  for  the  withdrawal 
of  American  troops  from  Mexico,  a  doctrine  which 
Adams  declared  Sumner  had  been  the  first  man  in 
the  United  States  to  proclaim  and  to  argue  at 
length. 

In  the  fall  of  1847  Sumner  was  placed  at  the  head 
of  the  one  hundred  and  more  Boston  delegates  to  the 
Whig  state  convention.  Here  again  the  contest  was 
renewed  between  the  two  wings  of  the  party,  espe 
cially  over  Palfrey's  resolution,  binding  Massachu 
setts  Whigs  to  "  support  no  men  for  the  offices  of 
President  and  Vice -President  of  the  United  States 
but  such  as  are  known  by  their  acts  or  declared 
opinions  to  be  opposed  to  the  extension  of  slavery." 
Palfrey,  Sumner,  Adams  and  Allen  spoke  earnestly 


IN  THE  ANTI-SLAVERY  RANKS       113 

in  favor  of  thus  making  resistance  (o  slavery  the 
paramount  issue  in  the  selection  of  candidates,  a 
sentiment  which  was  greeted  by  hisses  especially 
from  the  ranks  of  the  Boston  delegates.  Winthrop 
led  the  opposition  to  the  passage  of  this  resolution 
and  succeeded  in  defeating  it,  thus  for  the  second 
time  blocking  the  purposes  of  the  anti-slavery  men 
in  state  convention.  In  the  ensuing  session  of 
Congress  Wiuthrop  was  a  candidate  for  the  speaker- 
ship,  and  Southerners  were  the  more  attracted  to 
him  from  the  fact  that  he  had  made  himself  obnox 
ious  to  anti-slavery  men  in  his  own  state.  Before  the 
balloting  began,  Palfrey  sent  to  Winthrop  certain 
inquiries  as  to  the  policy  which  he  intended,  if 
elected,  to  promote  by  his  committee  appointments, 
particularly  in  regard  to  the  continuance  of  the 
Mexican  War  and  other  matters  relating  to  slavery. 
Winthrop  refused  to  make  any  advance  statement, 
and  in  consequence  both  Giddings  and  Palfrey — al 
though  personally  urged  by  John  Quincy  Adams  to 
vote  for  Winthrop — voted  against  him,  an  action 
which  called  down  upon  them  the  wrath  of  the  con 
servative  Whigs. l  Sumner  immediately  sent  Palfrey 
a  letter  of  warm  commendation  and  came  to  his  de 
fense  in  two  spirited  newspaper  articles,  insisting 
that  a  man  who  deemed  opposition  to  slavery  the 
one  essential  issue  and  who  was  an  unwavering  op- 

1  It  was   this  vote  of   Palfrey's  that  called   forth  the  famous 
11  Remarks  of  Increase  D.  O'Phace,  at  an  extrumpery  caucus  in 
State  Street,  as  reported  by  Mr.  H.  Biglow,"  beginning 
"No?    Hezhe?    He  hain't,  though?    Wut?    Voted  agin  him? 

If  the  bird  of  our  country  could  ketch  him,  she'd  skin  him  !  " 


114  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

pouent  of  the  war,  could  not  with  self-respect 
support  a  man  who  was  hesitating  in  his  attitude 
toward  slavery  and  whose  vote  had  given  sanction 
to  the  war. 


CHAPTER  VII 

MASSACHUSETTS  AND  THE  COMPROMISE  :   SUMNER'S 
ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE 

No  sooiier  was  the  war  with  Mexico  at  an  end 
than  the  question  became  urgent,  what  should  be 
done  with  the  ceded  territory,  and  what  would  be 
the  effect  of  the  acquisition  of  such  domain  upon 
the  balance  between  the  free  and  slave  states  f  So 
big  with  embarrassment  and  danger  had  this  ques 
tion  loomed  in  advance,  that  not  a  few  men  had 
sought  to  forestall  it  by  securing  from  Congress  be 
fore  the  end  of  the  war  a  declaration  against  any 
acquisition  of  territory  from  Mexico.  To  this 
scheme  both  Webster  and  Winthrop  gave  their 
earnest  support.  To  Sunnier,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  project  seemed  futile,  for  he  believed  that  the 
acquisition  of  such  territory  was  a  thing  inevitable. 
Moreover,  throughout  his  life,  he  showed  himself  a 
zealous  expansionist  whenever  he  believed  annex 
ation  of  the  territory  in  question  would  make  for 
both  the  strength  of  the  nation  and  the  advantage 
of  the  people  to  be  annexed.1 

The  year  1848  was  a  time  that  tried  men's  souls. 
Perhaps  the  hardest  testing  came  to  the  old  mem 
bers  of  the  Whig  party  of  the  type  of  Webster. 
Conscious  of  the  party's  weakness  with  the  mass  of 

1  Infra,  pp.  318-319  ;  363-364. 


116  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  people,  the  Whig  leaders  again  made  anxious 
search  for  a  vote-getter  as  their  candidate  for  the 
presidency,  and  finally  nominated  Taylor,  a  Louisi 
ana  slave-owner  who  had  won  glory  in  the  victories 
of  a  war  instigated  and  fought  to  advance  the 
interests  of  slavery.  Upon  the  instant,  this  stulti 
fying  nomination  opened  schism,  in  the  party  : 
Charles  Allen  and  Henry  Wilson,  the  most  in 
fluential  members  of  the  Massachusetts  delegation 
in  the  national  convention  at  Philadelphia,  declared 
that  they  would  do  all  in  their  power  to  defeat  the 
nominee,  and  withdrew  from  the  convention,  Allen 
declaring  that  the  Whig  party  was  from  that  day 
dissolved.1 

Indeed,  its  dissolution  had  already  been  foreseen, 
and  in  Massachusetts  there  had  been  prepared  in 
Sumner's  office  a  call  for  a  convention  of  all  citizens 
of  the  commonwealth  opposed  to  the  nomination  of 
Cass  and  of  Taylor.2  This  call  was  headed  by 
Charles  Francis  Adams,  and  Sumner's  name  stood 
second  on  the  list  of  signers.  In  response,  there 
gathered  in  Worcester,  June  28,  1848,  a  throng  of 
5,000  earnest  opponents  of  slavery,  and  beneath  the 
trees  of  the  Common — for  no  hall  would  hold  the 
crowd — as  Sumner  himself  later  asserted,  "was  the 
beginning  of  the  separate  Free  Soil  organization  in 

1  G.  F.  Hoar,  Autobiography  of  Serenty  Years,  Vol.  I,  p.  146. 
Wilson,  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Slave,  Power  in  America,  Vol.  II,  p. 
136. 

5  Folding  and  directing  the  call  for  this  convention  was  the 
first  political  work  ever  done  by  George  Frisbie  Hoar. — Auto 
biography,  p.  148. 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  117 

Massachusetts,  which  afterward  grew  into  the  Re 
publican  party. "  Half  a  century  later  Senator 
Hoar  recalled  as  the  most  vivid  impression  of  that 
memorable  day  "  the  manly  form  of  Charles  Sum- 
ner  in  the  splendor  and  vigor  and  magnetic  power 
of  his  youthful  eloquence."  *  Strong  anti-slavery 
resolutions  were  adopted,  and  six  delegates  were 
chosen  to  attend  a  convention  which  was  held,  six 
weeks  later,  at  Buffalo,  where  Martin  Van  Buren 
was  nominated  for  the  presidency.  Suinner  at 
tended  this  first  national  convention  of  the  Free 
Soilers,  but  not  as  a  member,  since  it  was  thought 
good  politics  to  choose  the  delegates  from  among 
leaders  who  had  been  closely  identified  with  exist 
ing  parties. 

1  Over  words  used  by  Sumner  in  his  speech  at  Worcester, 
charging  that  Taylor's  nomination  had  been  "  brought  about 
by  an  unhallowed  union,  conspiracy  rather  let  it  be  called, 
.  .  between  the  Lords  of  the  lash  and  the  Lords  of  the 
loom,"  a  heated  controversy  arose  between  Nathan  Appleton 
and  Sumner.  Copies  of  these  interesting  letters  were  presented 
in  manuscript  to  the  Boston  Public  Library  in  1874.  In  justi 
fying  his  language,  Suinner  tells  of  an  interview  with  Abbott 
Lawrence,  on  the  latter's  invitation,  in  which,  ten  days  before 
the  Philadelphia  convention,  Lawrence  told  Sumner  that  Tay 
lor  would  be  nominated  and  that  he  had  consented  to  allow  his 
own  name  to  be  used  for  Vice-President.  Sumner  most  ear 
nestly  protested,  but  Lawrence  said  :  "What  can  I  do  about  it? 
I  am  in  up  to  the  eyes."  Mr.  Appleton  insisted  that  for  months 
before  the  convention  met  he  had  been  convinced  that  Taylor 
was  the  only  Whig  who  could  be  elected  ;  that  he  could  be,  and 
was  worthy  to  be  ;  that  there  was  no  chance  of  Webster's  being 
either  nominated  or  elected.  Lawrence's  nomination  he  be 
lieved  was  defeated  "  by  his  fellow  citizens  and  neighbors  "  and 
he  added  :  ''  I  consider  the  conduct  of  Allen  and  Wilson  in  that 
convention  as  the  most  disgraceful  piece  of  political  swindling 
which  has  ever  fallen  within  my  ken,  a  transaction  from 
which  every  honorable  mind  should  revolt." 


118  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

Into  the  campaign  which  ensued  Sumuer  threw 
himself  with  great  vigor.  He  was  made  chairman 
of  the  committee  charged  with  its  management. 
There  was  urgent  demand  for  his  services  in  other 
states,  but,  with  the  exception  of  a  week  of  cam 
paigning  in  Maine,  he  devoted  all  his  energies  to 
his  own  state.  He  spoke  in  twenty-seven  cities  and 
towns.  Everywhere  he  captivated  his  audiences, 
winning  approval  of  his  speeches  even  from  oppo 
nents  and  a  hostile  press,  which  called  him  the 
" Demosthenes"  of  his  party.  Though  he  ordi 
narily  spoke  for  three  hours,  he  kept  his  hearers 
keyed  to  a  high  pitch  of  enthusiasm.  Only  at 
Cambridge  did  he  encounter  disturbance,  till  it  was 
silenced  by  Sumner's  retort:  "The  young  man 
who  hisses  will  regret  it  ere  his  hair  turns  gray. 
He  can  be  no  son  of  New  England  ;  her  soil  would 
spurn  him." 

What  this  campaign  meant  for  Sunmer's  future 
was  perhaps  less  clearly  understood  by  him  than  by 
some  of  his  friends.  It  made  him  known,  through 
out  the  state,  no  longer  merely  as  a  platform  orator 
upon  literary  themes,  but  as  an  effective  political 
leader  and  debater.  Longfellow  wrote  in  his  diary 
on  October  22,  1848:  "Sunmer  stands  now,  as  he 
himself  feels,  just  at  the  most  critical  point  of  his 
life.  Shall  he  plunge  inevitably  into  politics  or 
not?  That  is  the  question  ;  and  it  is  already  an 
swered.  He  inevitably  will  do  so,  and  after 
many  defeats  will  be  very  distinguished  as  a 
leader.  .  .  .  From  politics  as  a  career  he  still 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  119 

shrinks  back.  When  he  has  once  burned  his  ships, 
there  will  be  no  retreat.  He  already  holds  in  his 
hands  the  lighted  torch. " 

Sumner  received  the  unanimous  nomination  of 
the  Free  Soilers  for  member  of  Congress  from  the 
Boston  district.  There  was  no  hope  of  securing  his 
election,  but  the  campaign  of  education  was  effect 
ive,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  he  polled  less, 
than  a  third  the  number  of  votes  that  were  cast  for 
Wiuthrop.  But  Sumuer  shared  with  other  leaders 
of  the  movement  the  bitter  resentment  of  the 
Whigs  against  the  Free  Soilers,  painful  separations 
from  former  friends  and  violent  abuse  from  the 
Boston  press.  He  felt  these  hurts  keenly,  but  con 
soled  himself  with  John  Quincy  Adams's  words  to 
him,  in  the  last  year  of  his  life,  "  No  man  is  abused, 
whose  influence  is  not  felt." 

As  a  result  of  their  efforts  in  the  national  election 
of  1848,  the  Free  Soilers  saw  little  prospect  of  mak 
ing  large  enough  accessions  to  their  ranks  to  play 
an  important  part  as  an  independent  organization. 
To  many  of  their  leaders,  including  Sumner,  it 
seemed  wisest  to  adopt  an  opportunist  policy  :  to 
hold  fast  to  their  anti-slavery  principles,  but  to  seek 
their  practical  advancement  by  voting  with  the 
party  which  would  make  the  most  valuable  con 
cessions.  An  alliance  between  Whigs  and  anti- 
slavery  men  in  New  Hampshire  had  already  suc 
ceeded  in  electing  John  P.  Hale  to  the  United 
States  Senate.  Forthwith  a  similar  coalition  began 
to  be  mooted  in  Massachusetts  between  the  Free 


120  CHAELES  SUMNEB 

Boilers  and  the  Democrats.     Their  combined  vote 
would  exceed  that  of  the  conservative  Whigs  by 
nearly  12,000.     To  this  policy  of  coalition  Sunnier 
felt   none    of    the    repugnance   which    held    back 
many  of  his  former  friends,  whose  connection  with 
the  Whig  party  had  been  more  intimate  than  his. 
Party  to  Sumner,   all  his  life  long,  was  merely  a 
jneans  to  an  end.      In  their  state  convention  in 
I  1849  the  Democrats  adopted  resolutions  opposing 
1  the  extension  of  slavery  in  the  territories.     Sumuer 
/  therefore  favored  alliance  with  them  in  the  election 
of  anti-slavery  candidates.     With  little  effort  they 
succeeded  in  electing  thirteen  members  of  the  Sen 
ate  and  one  hundred  and  thirty  of  the  House, — a 
long  step  toward  the  more  effective  coalition  of  the 
following  year. 

,  In  the  country  at  large  there  were  beginning  to 
appear  results  of  the  Mexican  War  vastly  different 
from  those  sought  by  the  men  who  forced  it  upon 
the  country.  The  convention  that  framed  the  con 
stitution  on  which  was  based  California's  applica 
tion  for  admission  to  the  Union,  by  unanimous  vote 
inserted  in  it  a  section  prohibiting  slavery,  and  the 
people  of  New  Mexico  forthwith  petitioned  Con 
gress  that  slavery  be  prohibited  in  the  law  for  their 
territorial  government.  The  thought  of  such  con 
cessions  was  intolerable  to  Southern  leaders  in  Con 
gress,  and  in  1849  and  1850  they  did  not  hesitate  to 
threaten  secession  if  Congress  should  prohibit  slavery 
in  the  territories  or  admit  California  as  a  free  state. 
The  issue  had  become  full  of  menace,  when  Clay  iu- 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  121 

troduced  his  scheme  of  pacification  ;  its  provisions 
were  under  debate  for  many  months  before  they 
finally  secured  enactment  as  separate  laws,  which 
have  become  known  collectively  as  the  Compromise 
of  1850.  Its  fate  still  hung  in  the  balance,  when 
Webster  came  to  its  support.  It  is  needless  here  to 
review  the  arguments  of  that  epoch-making  speech. 
There  is  no  question  that  it  exercised  a  most  potent 
influence  in  securing  the  adoption  of  the  compromise 
measures.  But  the  fact  that  here  needs  emphasis  is 
that  Webster's  Seventh  of  March  speech  produced 
a  revolution  in  Massachusetts  politics  by  virtue  of 
which  within  a  few  months  Webster's  place  in  the 
Senate  was  taken  not  by  his  logical  successor,  Wiu- 
throp,  but  by  the  radical,  Sumner. 

Historians  may  continue  to  debate  whether  ambi 
tion  or  enlightened  patriotism  dictated  that  speech. 
Our  present  concern  is  with  its  effect  upon  Massa 
chusetts.  The  Webster  who  had  repeatedly  op 
posed  the  extension  of  slavery  and  who  had  taken 
the  lead  in  insisting  that  the  Wrilmot  Proviso  must 
be  applied  to  the  territory  ceded  by  Mexico,  now 
opposed  such  restrictions.  That  Webster  should 
find  himself  out  of  sympathy  with  some  Abolition 
ists  was  not  strange  ;  but  in  this  speech  he  showed 
no  discrimination  between  radicals  who  denounced 
the  Constitution  as  a  league  with  Hell,  and  men  of 
an  utterly  different  stamp,  who  urged  that  the 
national  government's  acts  should  extend  rather 
than  curtail  the  domain  of  freedom  : — all  these  he 
grouped  together  and  heaped  upon  them  coarse 


122  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

abuse  and  derisive  epithets.  Most  disheartening 
of  all  was  the  support  which  he  gave  to  the  barbarous 
Fugitive  Slave  Bill.  The  feeling  produced  in  the 
hearts  of  thousands  throughout  the  commonwealth 
found  fitting  expression  in  "Ichabod,"  which 
Whittier  declared  was  written  "in  one  of  the 
saddest  moments  of  my  life,"  as  "the  outcome  of 
the  surprise  and  grief  and  forecast  of  evil  con 
sequences"  caused  by  the  reading  of  this  speech: 

"So  fallen  !  so  lost !  the  light  withdrawn 

Which  once  he  wore ! 
The  glory  from  his  gray  hairs  gone 
Fore vermore  ! ' ' 

Nevertheless,  as  the  summer  months  came  and 
the  compromise  measures  still  hung  in  suspense, 
Webster's  arguments  and  influence  began  to  tell 
strongly  with  the  timorous  and  with  the  traders. 
Dana  later  declared  :  "The  truth  is,  Daniel  Web 
ster  was  strong  enough  to  subjugate  for  a  time  the 
moral  sentiment  of  New  England. ' ' l  Massachusetts 
manufacturers  and  Boston  merchants  were  per 
suaded  that  there  was  no  chance  of  securing  pro 
tective  modifications  of  the  tariff  unless  at  the  price 
of  concessions  to  the  South.  In  less  than  a  month 
from  the  time  when  Webster  broke  his  silence,  his 
course  as  to  the  Compromise  was  approved  in  a 
public  letter,  signed  by  hundreds  of  Boston's  most 
representative  men,  including  not  a  few  in  Simmer's 

'From  his  diary,  June  25,  1854.  Adams's  Biography  of 
Dana,  Vol.  I,  p.  286. 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  123 

circle  of  intimates — even  Prescott  and  Feltou  ;  and 
the  news  of  the  final  passage  of  the  Compromise  was 
hailed  by  the  firing  of  a  hundred  guns  on  Boston 
Common.  Meantime,  in  July,  Webster  had  be 
come  Fillmore's  Secretary  of  State  and  Wiuthrop 
had  been  appointed  to  the  seat  temporarily  vacant 
in  the  Senate.  To  fill  the  vacancy  thus  caused  in 
the  House,  Suinner  was  nominated  by  the  Free 
Soilers,  but  was  defeated  by  a  vote  of  five  to  one, 
by  S.  A.  Eliot,  whom  the  Whigs  nominated 
avowedly  because  of  his  earnest  support  of  the 
Compromise,  and  whom  Webster  greeted  in  a  pri 
vate  letter,  upon  his  arrival  in  Washington,  as 
"the  personification  of  Boston, — ever  intelligent, 
ever  patriotic,  ever  glorious  Boston."  l  Eliot,  who 
had  voted  for  the  anti- slavery  resolutions  recently 
passed  by  the  Massachusetts  legislature,  now  voted 
in  favor  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill.  He  declined  re 
election  at  the  end  of  his  brief  term,  and  was  suc 
ceeded  by  another  of  Boston's  leading  citizens  of 
similar  views. 

The  enforcement  of  the  new  Fugitive  Slave  Law 
soon  aroused  intense  opposition  throughout  the 
North.  Nevertheless  reclamations  were  made  in 
various  cities,  even  of  persons  who  under  the  older 
law  had  been  safe  from  seizure.  The  expression  of 
anti-slavery  sentiment  in  Boston  and  especially  the 
holding  of  a  meeting  in  Faneuil  Hall  to  denounce 
the  new  law  seemed  to  arouse  its  upholders  to  a  de- 

1  Eliot  was  the  man  whom  Sumner  had  most  strongly  an 
tagonized  in  the  Prison  Discipline  controversy.  Supra,  p.  98. 


124  CHAELES  SUMNER 

termination  that  in  Boston  it  should  be  most  rigor, 
ously  enforced.  A  few  fugitives  were  spirited 
away,  but  this  only  stirred  the  national  administra 
tion  to  renewed  energy.  Webster,  himself,  from  his 
office  of  Secretary  of  State,  *  *  took  a  personal  interest 
in  having  the  law  executed  in  Boston,  and  assumed 
the  direction  of  the  prosecutions,  although  it  properly 
belonged  to  the  Attorney-General."  l 

Sumuer  was  one  of  the  defense  of  Sims,  a  negro 
living  in  Boston,  who  was  claimed  by  a  Georgia 
slaveholder.  Sumner  laid  emphasis  upon  the  un 
judicial  powers  delegated  by  the  new  law  to  a  com 
missioner — not  a  judge — in  that  without  trial  by 
jury  he  could  give  a  certificate  of  rendition,  although 
the  negro  was  not  allowed  to  speak  in  his  own 
defense  and  no  adequate  means  were  provided  of 
testing  the  truthfulness  of  the  claimant's  testimony. 
But  all  efforts  in  Sims' s  behalf  proved  unavailing. 

Boston  adherents  of  compromise  presently  found 
divers  means  of  disciplining  those  who  were  not 
yielding  it  a  supine  compliance.  Ostracism  such  as 
Surnner  had  earlier  experienced  was  now  extended 
to  others,  and  the  leading  Boston  papers  opened 
their  columns  to  communications  urging  that  Sum 
ner  and  Howe,  Dana  and  Parker  and  others  named 
be  boycotted  (in  modern  phrase)  not  only  in  social 
but  also  in  business  relations,  that  the  cutting  off  of 
their  livelihood  might  reduce  them  to  silence. 

Even  before  the  Compromise  measures  were  finally 
adopted  by  Congress,  the  Free  Soilers  in  the  Massa- 

1  Adams,  Biography  of  Dana,  Vol.  I,  p.  228. 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  125 

chusetts  legislature  had  been  outspoken  in  their  de 
nunciation,  and  demanded  the  passage  of  resolu 
tions  which  should  put  the  state  in  opposition 
to  the  attitude  that  Webster  had  assumed.  In  all 
this  movement  the  lead  was  taken  by  Henry  Wilson, 
the  "Natiek  Cobbler,"  who  has  probably  never 
been  excelled  in  Massachusetts  in  his  power  of 
getting  close  to  the  great  masses  of  the  people  and 
of  understanding  their  thought  and  will.  To  the 
Whigs,  who  defeated  these  resolutions,  he  boldly 
declared:  "I  will  go  out  from  this  hall,  and  will 
unite  with  any  party  or  body  of  men  to  drive  you 
from  power,  rebuke  Daniel  Webster,  and  place  in 
his  seat  a  senator  true  to  the  principles  and  senti 
ments  of  the  commonwealth. ' y  At  his  call,  as  chair 
man  of  the.Free  Soil  state  committee,  there  assembled 
early  in  September  fifty  or  more  of  the  leading  Free 
Soilers.  He  bluntly  stated  the  object  of  the  meeting 
to  be  to  "  consider  the  policy  of  cooperation  with 
the  Democrats  at  the  next  election,"  particularly 
with  reference  to  securing  the  election  of  a  United 
States  senator.  This  proposed  coalition  was  earnestly 
opposed  by  the  more  prominent  of  the  Free  Soil 
leaders,  such  as  Palfrey,  Adams,  Dana  and  Samuel 
Hoar.  They  were  Whigs  of  many  years'  standing, 
and  could  not  overcome  a  repugnance  to  alliance 
with  the  Democrats, — a  repugnance  which  Sumner 
did  not  share.  In  this  matter  he  proved  himself  a 
better  prophet  and  a  shrewder  politician  than  men 
more  versed  in  party  warfare.  In  the  middle  of 
October  he  wrote  to  Charles  Allen:  "Nothing  is 


126  CHARLES  SUMNER 

clearer  to  me  than  this.  Our  friends  should,  if  pos 
sible,  secure  the  balance  of  power  in  the  legislature, 
so  as  to  influence  the  choice  of  senator.  Some  are 
sanguine  that  we  can  elect  one  of  our  men.  I  doubt 
this,  but  by  a  prudent  course  and  without  any  bar 
gain,  we  can  obtain  control  of  the  [state]  Senate. 
We  can  then  at  least  dictate  to  the  Whigs  whom 
they  shall  send."  l  To  Horace  Manu,  at  that  time  a 
candidate  for  reelection  to  Congress,  he  wrote  a 
fortnight  later,  urging  him  to  take  the  field  at  once. 
"  In  what  you  say,  be  careful  not  to  disturb  Demo 
crats.  They  are  desirous  of  an  excuse  for  support 
ing  you."  2 

Massachusetts  Democrats,  upon  their  side,  were 
favorably  disposed  to  coalition,  not  only  because  of 
their  opposition  to  the  Compromise  but  because  the 
existing  system  of  representation  in  the  state  did 
them  great  injustice.  The  constitution  required  that 
the  election  of  state  officers  should  be  by  a  majority 
vote ;  otherwise,  the  election  was  thrown  into  the 
legislature.  Moreover,  each  town  elected  its  repre 
sentatives  on  a  general  ticket,  with  the  result  that  to 
every  legislature  Boston  sent  forty-four  Whigs  ; 
whereas  if  the  city  had  been  districted,  the  minority 
party  would  have  received  a  very  considerable  repre 
sentation.  Further,  this  solid  block  of  Whigs  was 
elected  every  year  from  Boston,  whereas  towns  below 
a  certain  population  were  allowed  to  send  a  repre 
sentative  only  a  proportional  number  of  years  in  a 
decade.  In  the  year  1850,  however, — the  year  pre- 

1  Pierce,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  218.  *lbid.t  p.  219. 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  127 

ceding  a  decennial  state  valuation, — each  town  was 
allowed  to  send  at  least  one  member  ;  the  result  was 
that  in  the  large  legislature  of  that  year  there  were 
many  more  Democrats  than  usual,  smarting  under 
the  injustices  done  their  party. 

The  campaign  was  sharply  contested.  The  state  was 
thoroughly  covered  by  the  ablest  Free  Soil  speakers, 
helped  not  a  little  by  the  eloquence,  spirited  if 
crude,  of  a  number  of  young  men  fresh  from  college, 
whose  first  inspirations  in  politics  may  well  have 
come  from  Suniner's  Lyceum  lectures.  The  excite 
ment  was  made  the  more  tense  by  the  fact  that  a 
fugitive  slave  case  was  pending  in  Boston  in  the 
closing  days  of  the  campaign.  In  most  of  the 
counties  and  towns  the  Democrats  and  Free  Soilers 
united  in  support  of  the  same  candidates  for  the 
legislature,  and  their  alliance  returned  Mann  to 
Congress. 

In"  Faneuil  Hall,  Sumner  brought  the  campaign 
to  a  climax  in  one  of  the  most  effective  speeches  of 
his  life.1  After  brief  discussion  of  the  local  issues 
of  the  hour,  he  launched  into  a  scathing  denuncia 
tion  of  the  new  Fugitive  Slave  Law.  He  pointed 
out  its  barbarous  invasion  of  human  rights,  declar 
ing  that  the  soul  sickened  at  the  contemplation  of 
this  legalized  outrage.  He  challenged  the  mention 
of  any  act  of  shame  in  the  dreary  annals  of  the  past 
that  could  "  compare  in  atrocity  with  this  enact 
ment  of  an  American  Congress. "  Of  the  President 

l"Our  Immediate  Anti-Slavery  Duties,"  Novembers,  1850. 
Works,  Vol.  II,  pp.  398-424. 


128  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

who  signed  it,  he  said  :  "  Other  Presidents  maj»  foe 
forgotten;  but  the  name  signed  to  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Bill  can  never  be  forgotten.  There  are 
depths  of  infamy  as  there  are  heights  of  fame. 
.  .  .  Better  for  him  had  he  never  been  born.'7 
Eeferring  to  the  fact  that  he  himself  was  a  commis 
sioner  of  a  United  States  court,  "  before  whom  the 
panting  fugitive  may  be  dragged  for  the  decision  of 
the  question  whether  he  is  a  freeman  or  a  slave, " 
Sumner  said,  "  I  cannot  forget  that  I  am  a  man, 
although  I  am  a  commissioner," — a  sentence  which 
his  opponents  in  Massachusetts  at  the  time  and  later 
in  Washington  caught  up  as  proving  him  to  be 
reckless  and  inflammatory  in  word  and  in  deed.  He 
invoked  not  violence,  but  "the  contempt,  the  indig 
nation,  the  abhorrence  of  the  community'7  as  the 
weapons  which  should  drive  the  slave-hunter  out  of 
Massachusetts.  To  the  oft-urged  claim  that  the 
Compromise  had  settled  the  slavery  question,  came 
his  ringing  retort,  * l  Nothing,  sir,  can  be  settled 
which  is  not  right  !  " 

That  speech  made  Sumner  the  inevitable  choice 
for  the  Senate.  Its  deliberate  intent,  as  he  later  de 
clared,  was  to  u  create  a  public  sentiment  which 
would  render  the  enforcement  of  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Law  impossible."  His  audience  and  the  state  were 
fired  by  his  eloquence  and  by  his  courage.  The 
foes  of  compromise  instantly  saw  that  the  placing  of 
such  a  force  in  the  Senate  would  be  the  greatest  gain 
they  could  possibly  secure  for  their  cause.  In  the 
election  the  coalition  obtained  unhoped  for  success. 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  129 

They  blocked  the  election  of  a  governor,  and  chose 
a  majority  of  ten  of  the  senators  and  of  fifty-four  in 
the  House.  Other  names  were  suggested  as  possi 
bilities  for  the  Senate,  but  as  the  time  for  the  as 
sembling  of  the  legislature  approached,  Surnuer's 
name  was  everywhere  conceded  to  be  the  one  that 
would  be  fixed  upon,  not  only  because  of  his  bold 
and  effective  leadership,  as  in  the  Faueuil  Hall 
speech,  but  also  on  the  ground  of  political  expe 
diency,  since  Sumner  had  not  antagonized  Demo 
crats  by  leadership  in  the  Whig  party. 

Charles  Francis  Adams  wrote  to  him  from  Wash 
ington,  saying,  "  The  only  full  consideration  that 
we  can  receive  [for  the  coalition]  is  in  securing 
your  services  in  the  Senate."  To  this  Sumner  re 
sponded  ingenuously,  acknowledging  that  such 
an  election  would  be  a  grateful  vindication  of 
himself  against  the  attacks  to  which  he  had  been 
exposed,  and  that  it  would  open  up  an  attractive 
sphere  of  usefulness.  "  But,"  he  added,  "  notwith 
standing  these  things,  I  must  say  that  I  have  not 
been  able  at  any  time  in  my  inmost  heart  to  bring 
myself  to  desire  the  post  or  even  to  be  willing  to 
take  it.  My  dreams  and  visions  are  all  in  other  di 
rections.  In  the  course  of  my  life  I  have  had  many  ; 
but  none  have  been  in  the  United  States  Senate.  In 
taking  that  post,  I  must  renounce  quiet  and  repose 
forever  ;  my  life  henceforward  would  be  in  pub 
lic  affairs.  I  cannot  contemplate  this  without  re 
pugnance.  It  would  call  upon  me  to  forego  those 
literary  plans  and  aspirations  which  I  have  more 


130  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

at  heart  than  any  merely  political  success."  '  No 
charge  is  more  groundless  than  that  Charles  Sumner 
sought  this  office. 

Promptly  upon  assembling,  the  two  houses  of  the 
legislature  organized  by  the  election  of  Henry  Wil 
son,  President  of  the  Senate,  and  Nathaniel  P. 
Banks,  Speaker  of  the  House,  positions  which,  by  a 
strange  coincidence,  they  were  both  soon  to  occupy 
in  the  national  legislature.  Conference  committees 
of  the  Free  Soilers  and  Democrats  came  together 
to  determine  the  programme  of  elections.  The  one 
thing  upon  which  the  Free  Soilers  insisted  was  that  a 
Free  Soiler,  chosen  by  them,  should  be  elected  to 
the  United  States  Senate  for  the  full  term  ;  in  con 
sideration  of  this  they  were  willing  to  turn  over  to 
the  Democrats  all  the  state  offices  as  well  as  the  sen 
ator  to  be  chosen  for  the  few  weeks  of  Winthrop's 
uuexpired  term.  In  their  caucus,  January  7th,  the 
Free  Soilers  gave  a  practically  unanimous  nomina 
tion  to  Charles  Surnner ;  but  when  his  name  was 
presented  to  the  Democratic  caucus,  some  members 
demurred,  preferring  a  less  radical  an ti- slavery 
leader.  The  matter  was  referred  to  the  decision  of 
a  two-thirds  vote,  and  Sumner  received  fifty-eight 
votes  to  twenty-seven  for  all  others,  so  that  his  nom 
ination  was  formally  approved,  with  but  five  Demo 
cratic  votes  against  him.  George  S.  Boutwell, 
Democrat,  was  forthwith  elected  governor,  and  the 
other  state  offices  were  filled  in  accordance  with  the 
programme.  But  presently  it  transpired  that  Caleb 
1  December  15,  1850.  Pierce,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  233. 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  131 

Gushing,  although  he  had  voted  in  favor  of  abiding 
by  the  two-thirds'  decision,  was  organizing  opposi 
tion  to  Stunner's  election  among  the  Democrats  and 
that  some  Free  Boilers— even  Palfrey,  in  an  open 
letter  to  members -of  the  legislature,— were  question 
ing  the  desirability  of  electing  a  pronounced  Free 
Soiler  to  the  Senate. 

In  order  to  elect  a  senator,  the  law  then  required 
the  concurrent  vote  of  the  two  houses.  On  the  day 
appointed  for  the  election  in  the  House,  the  corridors 
and  galleries  were  thronged.  Intense  excitement 
prevailed.  The  ballot  resulted  in  one  hundred  and 
eighty-six  votes  for  Sumner  (one  hundred  and  ten 
Free  Soil,  and  seventy-six  Democrat)  to  one  hun 
dred  and  sixty-seven  for  Winthrop,  with  twenty- 
eight  scattering  votes.  Sumner  had  failed  of  an 
election  by  five  votes.  The  outcome  provoked 
much  anxious  and  angry  discussion,  the  Free  Soilers 
resenting  the  Democrats'  defection.  This  proved 
the  beginning  of  the  longest  deadlock  that  Massa 
chusetts  has  ever  known.  For  three  mouths  and 
over,  the  election  hung  fire,  Sumner' s  vote  on  dif 
ferent  ballots  in  the  House  falling  anywhere  from 
two  to  twelve  short  of  the  number  necessary  to  elect. 
Meantime,  early  in  the  session,  he  had  been  elected 
on  the  part  of  the  Senate,  and  a  Democrat  had  been 
duly  elected  by  both  houses  for  the  vacancy  which 
Winthrop  was  filling  till  his  successor  should  be 
chosen. 

The  delay  encouraged  the  opposition,  and  they 
set  upon  the  Free  Soilers  and  upon  Sumner  in  par- 


132  CHAELES  SUMNER 

ticular  with  every  sort  of  abuse.  The  coalition  was 
assailed  in  the  press  as  "  scandalous/  '  involving  a 
' l  base  j  uggle, "  "  self-abasement  ' '  and  ' '  profligacy ' ' ; 
it  was  even  declared  an  u  indictable  offense, "  "  crim 
inal  not  only  in  morals  but  in  the  law  of  the  land." 
Every  similar  alliance  which  Whigs  had  made  in 
earlier  contests  was  banished  from  memory.  By 
faint-hearted  adherents  Sumner  was  urged  to  modify 
the  expressions  of  his  Faueuil  Hall  speech.  This  he 
promptly  refused  to  do.  He  was  waited  upon  by 
deputations  of  anxious  Democrats,  who  begged  for 
some  assurance  that,  if  elected,  he  would  not  agitate 
the  slavery  question  in  the  Senate.  His  unvarying 
answer  was  that  he  had  not  sought  the  office,  but 
that,  if  it  came  to  him,  he  should  enter  upon  it  ab 
solutely  untrammeled.  To  John  Bigelow  he  wrote  : 
"  It  is  very  evident  that  a  slight  word  of  promise  or 
yielding  to  the  Hunkers  would  have  secured  my 
election  ;  but  this  is  impossible.  The  charge  used 
with  most  effect  against  me  is  that  1  am  a  *  disun- 
ionist '  ;  but  the  authors  of  this  know  its  falsehood, 
— it  is  all  a  sham  to  influence  votes.  My  principles 
are,  in  the  words  of  Franklin,  '  to  step  to  the  verge 
of  the  Constitution  to  discourage  every  species  of 
traffic  in  human  flesh. '  I  am  a  constitutionalist  and 

— 

a  unionist,  and  have  always  been." 

While  refusing  to  make  any  concession  or  pledge, 

Sumner  again  and  again  told  individuals  that  he 

was  willing  to  stand  aside  for  any  other  candidate 

who  would  be  true  to  freedom  and  better  unite  the 

January  21,  1851.     Pierce,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  239. 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  133 

members  of  the  legislature  j  and  in  a  letter  to  Wil 
son,  to  be  communicated  to  the  Free  Soil  members, 
he  bade  them  abandon  him  whenever  they  thought 
best,  without  notice  or  apology.  But  his  adherents 
stood  firm,  believing  that  Sumner  better  than  any 
other  leader  could  serve  the  cause  of  freedom  in  the 
Senate.  After  many  earlier  discussions,  the  Free 
Soilers  in  caucus,  March  17th,  formally  deter 
mined  not  to  present  any  other  candidate.  In 
their  official  organ  his  Faueuil  Hall  speech  was 
reprinted  in  full,  as  still  acceptable  to  the  men  of 
the  party.  Yet  the  advice  of  the  governor,  who  al 
ready  held  his  office  as  a  result  of  votes  given  in  an 
ticipation  of  Sumner' s  election,  was  for  the  substi 
tution  of  a  less  radical  man. 

The  long  delay  in  the  fulfilling  of  pledges  was 
felt  by  many  members  of  the  House  to  be  undermin 
ing  their  hold  upon  their  constituents.  Indeed,  it 
was  by  pressure  from  outside  that  the  end  of  the 
conflict  was  finally  forced.  Resort  was  had  to  a 
provision  of  the  Massachusetts  Bill  of  Rights,  for 
years  unused,  by  virtue  of  which  at  special  town- 
meetings,  legally  called  for  that  purpose,  the  voters 
in  several  towns  met  and  by  formal  vote  "  in 
structed"  their  representatives  to  support  Sumner. 
To  such  a  mandate  they  yielded  prompt  obedience. 

For  three  weeks  early  in  April  no  vote  was  taken, 
for  the  law  did  not  then,  as  now,  require  daily  bal 
lots.  Upon  the  renewal  of  the  voting  Sumner  lacked 
but  a  single  vote.  Ostensibly  to  prevent  difficulty 
from  ballots  sticking  together,  a  Boston  Whig  moved 


134  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

that  the  ballots  be  enclosed  in  uniform  envelopes. 
It  was  suspected  that  the  real  object  of  the  motion 
was  to  enable  some  Democrat  with  less  observance 
to  vote  against  Sumner.  If  so,  the  device  failed  of  its 
intention,  for  upon  the  very  next  ballot  he  received 
193  votes,  the  precise  number  necessary  to  elect. 

At  the  time  the  vote  was  declared,  Sumner  was 
dining  at  the  house  of  Charles  Francis  Adams,  and 
the  news  was  brought  to  him  while  at  table. 
Charles  Francis  Adams,  Jr.,  then  a  lad  in  his  teens, 
was  the  first  to  congratulate  him.  He  recalled  in 
later  years  that  Sunnier  received  the  news  "with 
perfect  placidity"  and  "with  an  utter  absence  of 
any  apparent  elation  or  excessive  interest.  .  .  . 
He  certainly  was  far  less  elated  than  was  my  father 
or  any  of  my  father's  children. "  In  a  few  minutes 
Mr.  Adams's  library  was  thronged  with  men  who 
had  come  over  from  the  State  House  to  offer  their 
congratulations.  Sumner  soon  left  this  scene  of  ex 
citement,  and  went  to  Cambridge,  where  he  spent 
the  next  two  or  three  nights  at  the  home  of  Long 
fellow,  who  also  noted  his  lack  of  elation:  "The 
papers  are  all  ringing  with  l  Sumner,'  i  Sumner,'  and 
the  guns  are  thundering  out  their  triumph  ;  mean 
while  the  hero  of  the  strife  is  sitting  quietly  here, 
more  saddened  than  exalted."  l  This  was  no  pose. 
To  his  brother  George,  with  whom  he  corresponded 
with  the  utmost  frankness,  he  wrote  : 

"Now  that  the  victory  is  won,  my  former  dislike 
and  indifference  to  it  [the  Senate]  have  lost  none  of 

1  Longfellow's  Diary,  April  25th. 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  135 

their  strength.  From  the  bottom  of  my  heart  I  say 
that  1  do  not  wish  to  be  senator.  The  honors  of 
the  post  have  no  attraction  for  me  ;  and  I  feel  a  pang 
at  the  thought  that  I  now  bid  farewell  to  that  life 
of  quiet  study,  with  the  employment  of  my  pen, 
which  I  had  hoped  to  pursue.  At  this  moment, 
could  another  person,  faithful  to  our  cause,  be  chosen 
in  my  place,  I  would  resign.  I  am  humbled  by  the 
importance  attached  to  the  election.  Throughout 
Massachusetts,  and  even  in  other  states,  there  have 
been  bonfires,  firings  of  cannon,  ringing  of  bells, 
public  meetings,  and  all  forms  of  joy,  to  celebrate 
the  event.  As  I  read  of  these,  I  felt  my  inability 
to  meet  the  expectations  aroused.  Again,  I  wish  I 
was  not  in  the  place.  I  am  met  constantly  by  joy 
ful  faces,  but  I  have  no  joy ;  my  heart  is  heavy. 
Never  did  I  need  sympathy  and  friendly  succor 
more  than  now,  when  most  of  the  world  regards  me 
as  a  most  fortunate  man,  with  a  prospect  of  peculiar 
brilliancy."  l 

To  many  conservative  Whigs,  followers  of  Web 
ster,  Suuiuer's  election  was  as  the  gall  of  bitterness. 
By  them  his  views  were  held  to  be  little  less  danger 
ous  than  those  of  anarchists  to-day,  and  his  political 
associates  were  thought  "  plebeian  "  and  "  revolu 
tionary."  But  to  Free  Soilers  throughout  the  state 

1  April  29,  1851.     Pierce.  Vol.  Ill,  p.  247. 

2  Editorial  comment  in  Boston  papers  on  Stunner's  election  ran 
as  follows :  "  It  is  the  greatest  outrage  upon  the  feelings  of  the 
majority  of  the  people  of  the  state,  by  a  combination  between 
two  minorities,  which  we  have  ever  known  to  be  perpetrated  in 
any  states  of  the  Union.     We  regard  the  event  as  a  most  unfor 
tunate  one  for  the   reputation  of  the  state." — Daily  Advertiser. 
"  We  need  hardly  say  that  the  election  of  Mr.  Sumner  will  be 
regretted  by  all  who  wish  the  state  of  Massachusetts  to  stand 
where  she  has  stood,  nobly  and  firmly  fixed  in  her  loyalty  to  the 


136  CHARLES  SUMNER 

and  nation  Simmer's  election  was  a  cause  of  heart 
felt  rejoicings.  Not  a  few  men  present  when  the 
decisive  vote  was  announced  recalled  that  as  the 
happiest  moment  of  their  lives.  It  was  accepted 
not  merely  as  a  victory  won,  but  as  an  earnest  of 
greater  triumphs  to  follow.  Of  the  many  who  had 
helped  to  bring  this  about,  none  had  been  so  tireless 
or  so  effective  in  his  activity  as  Henry  Wilson,  who 
was  destined  to  be  Sumner' s  colleague  in  the  Senate 
before  the  end  of  his  first  term.  This  service  Sumner 
clearly  and  gratefully  recognized  :  "  To  your  ability 
energy,  determination,  and  fidelity  our  cause  owes 
its  present  success.  For  weal  or  woe,  you  must  take 
the  responsibility  of  having  placed  me  in  the  Senate 
of  the  United  States."  1  Earnest  and  cordial  letters 
came  to  Sumner  from  friends  both  at  home  and 
abroad.2  Theodore  Parker's  greeting  was  also  a 

American  Union. ' ' — Courier.  ' '  The  mountain  that  has  been  la 
boring  for  three  months  has  brought  forth  ;  and  Charles  Sumner, 
Esq. ,  has  been  elected  for  six  years  to  succeed  Mr.  Webster  in 
the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  This  will  be  a  sore  disappoint 
ment  to  the  Whig  party." — Transcript.  For  further  examples 
of  newspaper  comment,  see  Charles  Sumner  :  Memoir  and  Eulo 
gies,  by  W.  M.  Cornell,  p.  30.  But  the  Boston  Commonwealth 
of  May  16,  1851,  contained  a  long  and  very  favorable  comment. 

1  April  25,  1851.     Pierce,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  249. 

2  From  Salmon  P.  Chase  came  a  warm  letter  of  congratulation, 
beginning,  "  Laus  Deo  !     From  the  bottom  of  my  heart  I  con 
gratulate  you — no,  not  you  but  all  friends   of  freedom  every 
where  upon  your  election  to  the  Senate.     Now,  I  feel  as  if  I  had 
a  brother — colleague — one  with  whom  I  shall  sympathize  and 
be  able  fully  to  act."     He  speaks  of  Hale  as  "  too  much  an  off 
hand  man  himself  to  be  patient  of  consultation  "  ;  of  Seward  as 
"  meaning  to  maintain  his  own  position  as  an  anti-slavery  man 
in  the  Whig  party  and  only  in  the  Whig  party"  ;  and  thus  of 
Wade  :  "  He  will  generally  go  with  Seward. "     "None  of  these 


ELECTION  TO  THE  SENATE  137 

prophecy:  "You  told  me  once  that  you  were  in 
morals,  uot  in  politics.  Now  I  hope  you  will  show 
that  you  are  still  in  morals,  although  in  politics.  I 
hope  you  will  be  the  senator  with  a  conscience." 

are  to  me  as  you  are.  I  feel  that  you  have  larger,  broader  view.s, 
and  that  you  are  willing  to  labor  more  systematically  for  the  ac 
complishment  of  greater  purposes. "  In  this  and  in  later  letters 
he  urges  that  he  and  Sumner  take  lodgings  in  the  same  house 
at  Washington. — Letter  of  April  28,  1851.  Diary  and  Corre 
spondence  of  S.  P.  Chase,  Report  of  American  Historical  As 
sociation,  1902,  Vol.  II,  p.  235.  Among  the  papers  here  re 
printed  are  thirty-six  letters  from  Chase  to  Sumner,  covering 
the  period  from  1847  to  1860.  In  some  of  the  later  ones  there 
is  frank  discussion  of  the  programme  of  the  Republican  party 
and  of  Chase's  possible  candidacy  for  the  presidency. 

Sevvard's  greeting  was  hardly  less  cordial.  He  wrote  :  "  I 
take  new  courage  in  the  cause  of  truth  and  justice  when  I  see 
a  senator  coming  from  Massachusetts  imbued  with  the  uncom 
promising  devotion  to  freedom  and  humanity  of  John  Quincy 
Adams." 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS:  "  FREEDOM  NATIONAL, 
SLAVERY  SECTIONAL" 

THE  approach  of  the  time  for  the  opening  of 
Congress  found  Sumner  deeply  saddened.  On  the 
day  of  his  departure  for  Washington,  he  wept  like  a 
child  at  taking  leave  of  his  mother  and  his  dearest 
friends,  Howe  and  Longfellow.  To  Howe  he  wrote, 
a  few  hours  later,  i  i  I  stand  now  on  the  edge  of 
a  great  change.  ...  I  cannot  see  the  future  ; 
but  I  know  that  I  now  move  away  from  those  who 
have  been  more  than  brothers  to  me.  My  soul 
is  wrung,  and  my  eyes  are  bleared  with  tears.  God 
bless  you  ever  and  ever,  my  noble,  well-tried  and 
truly  dear  friend."  Throughout  his  life  Sumner 
was  a  man  of  deep  sentiment,  much  given  to  analyz 
ing  and  appraising  his  own  emotions  and  to  giving 
them  elaborate  expression  both  in  letters  and  in 
conversation. 

On  the  first  day  of  the  session  Sumner' s  credentials 
were  presented  by  General  Lewis  Cass,  at  Sumner' s 
request,  as  "  his  oldest  personal  friend  in  the  body."  l 

1  "  It  must  have  been  ludicrous  to  see  the  old  time-server,  Cass, 
act  as  the  senatorial  godfather  of  the  handsome  young  philan 
thropist,  Charles  Sumner.  January  and  May  are  more  alike." 
.  .  .  "The  Whig  who,  when  asked,  in  1848,  whether  he  would 
choose  Cass  or  Taylor,  replied  in  a  public  speech,  'If  two  evils 
are  presented  to  me,  I  will  take  neither,'  was  not  likely  to 
show  much  respect  for  the  card-houses  of  the  politicians." 
—Frederic  Bancroft,  Life  of  William  H.  Seward,  Vol.  I,  p.  298. 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS  139 

His  own  colleague,  John  Davis,  upon  whom  this 
service  would  naturally  have  devolved,  although  in 
Washington,  was  absent  from  the  Senate  at  this 
time,  whether  from  unwillingness  to  stand  sponsor 
for  Sumner  is  not  known.  In  later  years  it  was 
recalled  as  a  matter  of  dramatic  significance  that 
Henry  Clay,  * '  compromise  incarnate ' '  tottered  from 
the  Senate  chamber  for  the  last  time  the  very  day 
that  Charles  Sumner,  "  conscience  incarnate," 
entered  its  doors. 

The  Senate  was  undergoing  a  great  transformation. 
Calhoun  had  died  during  the  previous  session. 
Webster  had  become  Secretary  of  State,  and  was 
never  again  to  be  heard  in  that  body.  Benton,  who 
had  himself  just  been  defeated  for  reelection  because 
of  his  opposition  to  the  Compromise,  greeted  Sum 
ner  warmly,  but  "  assured  him.  that  he  had  come  to 
the  Senate  too  late.  All  the  great  issues  and  all  the 
great  men  were  gone.  There  was  nothing  left  but 
snarling  over  slavery,  and  no  chance  whatever  for  a 
career."  l  A  few  mouths  later,  Sumner' s  colleague, 
" Honest"  John  Davis,  declared  as  his  final  verdict 
upon  public  life:  "At  Washington  slavery  rules 
everything."  By  the  great  majority  of  senators  the 
Compromise  was  accepted  as  a  finality,  but  there 
were  a  few  heralds  of  a  new  day  :  John  P.  Hale  had 
been  sent  to  the  Senate  by  a  combination  of  New 
Hampshire  anti-slavery  Whigs  and  Democrats,  and 
Salmon  P.  Chase,  who  became  Sumner' s  closest 
political  associate,  had  been  elected  by  a  coalition 
1 J.  M.  Rogers,  Life  of  Benton,  p.  279. 


140  CHAELES  SUMMER 

of  Free  Boilers  and  Democrats  in  Ohio.  Aside 
from  these  two,  he  was  to  find  most  sympathy  in 
Seward  and  Wade,  though  neither  was  as  yet  con 
vinced  that  the  anti-slavery  cause  was  to  be  best 
furthered  by  cutting  loose  from  the  party  in  which 
he  had  attained  leadership. 

Sumner  selected  a  seat  next  to  Chase  on  the 
Democratic  side, — the  seat  which  had  recently  been 
vacated  by  Jefferson  Davis.  Contrary  to  the  pre 
dictions  of  the  Boston  press,  he  was  cordially  re 
ceived  by  his  colleagues,  not  only  of  the  North  but 
of  the  South  as  well.  The  seats  of  Butler  of  South 
Carolina  and  Mason  of  Virginia  were  close  to  Sum- 
ner's  and  they  were  soon  on  friendly  terms.  In 
Soule",  whom  Sumner  described  as  "the  most  pol 
ished  gentleman  of  the  Senate,"  he  found  a  valued 
friend.  But  as  a  new  member,  without  party  back 
ing,  he  was  "shelved"  in  the  committee  assign 
ments,  being  placed  at  the  foot  of  two  of  the  least 
important,— on  roads  and  canals,  and  on  revolu 
tionary  claims. 

In  personnel  the  Senate  was  then  far  from  its 
highest  plane.  Most  of  its  members  had  had  but 
scanty  training  for  statesmanship,  and  years  spent 
in  Congress  had  not  broadened  them.  There  was 
little  of  elevation  in  congressional  manners  or  con 
versation.  Liquors  were  always  at  hand,  and  their 
effects  were  too  frequently  apparent  in  the  course 
of  the  debates.  Tobacco  chewing  was  prevalent. 
It  is  not  strange  that  Sumner,  of  Puritan  stock, 
reared  in  the  best  education  and  culture  which  Har- 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS  141 

vard  and  Boston  could  impart,  and  broadened  by 
years  of  travel  and  intimate  association  with  the 
foremost  scholars,  judges  and  statesmen  of  Europe, 
should  have  confided  to  Longfellow,  in  these  first 
weeks  of  his  life  in  Washington  :  "I  feel  heart-sick 
here.  The  Senate  is  a  lone  place,  with  few  who  are 
capable  of  yielding  any  true  sympathy  to  me. 
.  .  .  Would  that  I  were  with  you,  and  could 
share  your  calm  thoughts!  As  for  me,  farewell 
content ;  farewell  the  tranquil  mind ! "  He  saw 
everywhere  the  trail  of  the  serpent:  "In  truth, 
slavery  is  the  source  of  all  our  baseness,  from  gigan 
tic  national  issues  down  to  the  vile  manners  and 
profuse  expectorations  of  this  place."  *  His  depres 
sion  may  well  have  been  due  to  the  crush  of  unfa 
miliar  duties,  all  of  which  he  took  most  seriously, 
and  in  part  to  his  lonely  life.  On  coming  to  Wash 
ington,  he  secured  lodgings  on  the  ground  floor  of  a 
house  on  New  York  Avenue,  between  Fifteenth  and 
Sixteenth  Streets.  Here  his  breakfast  was  served  ; 
for  dinner,  his  only  other  meal,  he  frequented  a 
French  restaurant,  where  two  or  three  other  men  in 
official  life  became  his  regular  table  companions. 
This  cheerless  mode  of  life  found  some  relief  in  the 
cordiality  with  which  he  was  received  by  members 
of  the  diplomatic  corps,  to  whom  his  facile  use  of 
French,  a  rare  accomplishment  among  congressmen 
of  that  day,  and  his  familiar  knowledge  of  European 
society  and  politics,  especially  commended  him.  At 
the  British  embassy  and  at  the  home  of  the  Spanish 
1  December  28,  1851. 


U2  CHAELES  SUMNER 

minister  he  was  warmly  welcomed.  The  two  sena 
tors  from  New  York  were  especially  cordial  to  him. 
The  junior,  Hamilton  Fish,  had  taken  the  oath  of 
office  at  the  same  time  with  Simmer,  and  their  lives 
were  destined  to  influence  each  other  profoundly  in 
later  years.  In  both  Mrs.  Fish  and  Mrs.  Seward 
Sumner  found  staunch  friends,  who  watched  his 
career  with  eager  sympathy  and  heartened  him  for 
his  great  task. 

Ten  days  after  the  opening  of  the  session  Sumner 
first  addressed  the  Senate  upon  a  resolution  offered 
by  Seward,  which  gave  to  Louis  Kossuth,  the  Hun 
garian  patriot,  in  behalf  of  the  people  of  the  United 
States,  ' '  a  cordial  welcome  to  the  capital  and  to  the 
country.  >  '  Kossuth  had  come  to  America  in  response 
to  an  invitation  from  Congress,  and  upon  a  United 
States  steam  frigate.  Sumner  spoke  but  briefly.1 
He  paid  an  appreciative  tribute  to  Kossuth' s  efforts 
in  behalf  of  his  countrymen,  and  urged  the  propriety 
of  his  being  formally  received  by  Congress  in  view 
of  the  invitation  which  Congress  had  tendered  him. 
But  he  took  occasion  to  emphasize  our  traditional 
policy  of  non-intervention  in  the  domestic  affairs  of 
other  nations,  and  vigorously  opposed  any  departure 
from  this  policy  by  steps  which  might  lead  to  bellig 
erent  intervention  in  European  affairs.  The  resolu 
tion  was  passed  in  the  form  Sumner  advocated,  and 
Kossuth  found  in  Washington  a  cordial  reception  at 
the  hands  of  Congress  and  great  sympathy  and  per 
sonal  kindness  ;  but  the  tide  of  popular  sentiment, 
1  December  10,  1851.  Works,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  1-10. 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS  143 

which  he  had  counted  upon  turning  to  the  active 
service  of  the  Hungarian  revolution,  had  already 
waned,  largely  owing  to  this  maiden  speech  of 
Stunner's. 

This  speech  was  declared  the  most  successful 
first  speech  which  had  been  made  in  the  Senate  for 
a  long  time,  and  a  Boston  Whig  editor,  who  heard 
it,  said  that  Sumner  had  "achieved  a  triumph." 
It  was  a  surprise  to  his  opponents  and  a  reassurance 
to  his  doubtful  supporters  to  find  Sumner,  who  had 
been  heralded  as  a  radical  of  one  idea,  prepared  to 
deal  in  statesmanlike  fashion  with  a  problem  of  for 
eign  relations,  and  to  stand  forth  as  the  most  vigor 
ous  defender  of  the  faith  of  the  Fathers.  Singularly, 
it  was  from  party  and  personal  friends  that  the  se 
vere  criticisms  came.  The  Free  Soilers,  eager  to  fill 
their  depleted  ranks  before  the  beginning  of  the  next 
campaign,  had  hoped  that  the  sentiments  aroused  in 
behalf  of  the  struggling  Hungarians  would  react  to 
the  advantage  of  the  champions  of  freedom  in  this 
country.  Wilson  deplored  the  conservatism  which 
would  hold  Congress  back  from  active  and  armed 
intervention.  From  Howe,  a  lifelong  revolutionist, 
came  a  reproachful  letter  deprecating  "this  speech 
of  Lawyer  Sumner,  Senator  Sumner, — not  of  gener 
ous,  chivalrous,  high-souled  Charles  Sumner.'7 

The  next  cause  to  which  he  turned  his  attention 
was  one  in  which  Massachusetts  felt  little  interest. 
He  advocated  a  grant  of  lands  to  the  state  of  Iowa 
to  promote  the  construction  of  railroads  within  that 
state.  Friendly  recognition  from  the  West  rewarded 


144  CHAKLES  SUMMER 

this  evidence  of  his  ability  and  disposition  to  handle 
the  genera]  problems  which  confront  the  legislator. 
He  concerned  himself  conscientiously  with  many 
such  during  this  first  session,  advoe^wj,  in  partic 
ular,  an  increase  in  the  pay  of  enffsted  men  in  the 
navy,  cheaper  ocean  postage,  and  the  revision  and 
codification  of  the  public  statutes. 

Not  a  little  of  Sumuer's  time,  during  his  first 
months  in  Washington,  was  devoted  to  an  attempt 
to  procure  the  release  of  Drayton  and  Sayres,  of  the 
schooner  Pearl,  who  for  four  years  had  been  in  prison 
under  sentence  of  fines  which  they  could  not  pay. 
A  petition,  largely  signed  by  Free  Soilers,  was  for 
warded  to  Sumner  for  presentation  in  the  Senate. 
But  in  his  opinion  the  chief  thing  was  to  secure  the 
prisoners'  release,  and,  believing  that  agitation  in 
the  Senate  would  be  likely  to  defeat  that  object,  in 
stead  of  presenting  the  petition  he  appealed  directly 
to  the  President  for  the  prisoners'  pardon,  with  such 
effective  importunity  that  the  order  was  given  for 
their  release.  His  success  in  this  matter  is  the  more 
surprising  in  view  of  the  fierce  attack  made,  in  his 
Faneuil  Hall  speech,  upon  Fillmore  as  the  President 
who  had  signed  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law. 
„,  Sumner  had  owed  his  election  to  the  Senate 
simply  and  solely  to  the  belief  that  he  was  the  most 
forceful  and  fearless  champion  whom  the  Free 
Soilers  could  put  forward.  Moreover,  his  one 
weapon,  it  had  been  supposed,  was  ready  and 
effective  speech.  Yet  days,  weeks,  months  of  this 
critical  session  passed,  and  no  word  came  from 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS  145 

Simmer's  lips  on  the  one  absorbing  topic  of  iu- 
terest.  Not  only  did  he  seein  to  seek  no  oppor 
tunity  to  speak  upon  it,  but  he  was  silent  when  the 
opportunity  was  thrust  upon  him,  as  in  the  petition 
for  the  release  of  Dray  ton  and  Say  res, — sent  to  the 
Senate  as  a  peg  on  which  to  hang  a  speech, — 
and  as  in  the  angry  discussion  of  Foote's  resolution 
declaring  the  Compromise  a  final  settlement  of 
questions  relating  to  slavery.  The  Whig  press 
teemed  with  taunts,  and  this  long-continued  silence 
came  to  disquiet  greatly  the  members  of  his  own 
party.  The  letter  which  communicated  to  him  the 
fact  that  the  Free  Soilers  in  the  Massachusetts  legis 
lature  had  practically  unanimously  placed  Sumner 
in  nomination  for  the  Senate,  had  ended  with  the 
words  :  "  We  have  sworn  to  stand  by  you  ;  to  sink 
or  swim  with  you,  at  all  hazards.  If  you  shall  fail 
us  in  any  respect,  may  God  forgive  you  !  we  never 
shall !  "  The  memory  of  Webster's  defection  was 
still  so  fresh  in  men's  minds,  that  suspicion  found 
congenial  soil.  Sumner' s  intimates  never  doubted 
his  steadfastness  of  purpose,  and  were  disposed  to 
rely  upon  his  judgment  as  to  the  time  when  he 
should  speak.  But  Garrison  repeatedly  attacked 
Sumuer  in  the  Liberator,  and  popular  impatience 
among  auti -slavery  men  who  did  not  know  him 
personally  was  growing  rapidly,  so  that  Wilson, 
Sumuer' s  political  mentor,  felt  obliged  to  warn 
him  :  "  You  must  not  let  the  session  close  without 
speaking.  Should  you  do  so,  you  would  be  openly 
denounced  by  nine-tenths  of  our  people.  They  say 


146  CHARLES  SUMMER 

they  are  daily  tormented  about  your  silence  by  the 
Whigs  all  over  the  state,  and  many  of  them  think 

fevyou  will  not  speak  at  all." 

££     In  these  seven  months  of  delay,  however,  Suinner 

^  had  not  wavered  from  his  fixed  purpose.  His  de 
termination  to  make  haste  slowly  had  been  deliber 
ately  taken.  Six  mouths  before  he  took  his  seat, 

x  he  had  written  to  a  friend  :  "  As  a  stranger  to  the 
Senate  and  to  all  legislative  bodies,  I  regard  it  to 
be  my  first  duty  to  understand  the  body  in  which  I 
have  a  seat  before  rushing  into  its  con  tests."  Early 
in  the  session  he  had  resolved  that,  unless  forced  to 
do  so  by  the  course  of  the  debates,  he  would  not 
speak  at  length  upon  the  slavery  question  until 
about  the  first  of  July.  Meanwhile  he  was  gather 
ing  material  and  deciding  upon  his  lines  of  attack. 
But  as  the  time  he  had  chosen  approached,  he  met 
unexpected  obstacles.  Overwork  and  the  heat  told 
upon  his  strength,  so  that  for  weeks  he  was  far 
from  equal  to  his  task.  At  last,  July  27th,  he 
sought  to  make  an  opening  for  his  speech,  by  pre 
senting  a  resolution,  "  instructing  the  Committee  on 
the  Judiciary  to  report  a  bill  repealing  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Act."  The  next  day — stating  that  his  inex 
perience  and  his  ill  health  had  prevented  his  seek 
ing  this  opportunity  earlier — he  moved  to  take  up 
this  resolution.  It  was  the  uniform  custom  of  the 
Senate  to  grant  such  a  privilege,  yet  so  eager  were 
the  members  of  both  the  great  parties  to  keep  all 
discussion  of  slavery  questions  in  abeyance  during 

1  June  29,  1852. 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS  147 

the  impending  presidential  campaign,  that  his  mo 
tion  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  three  to  one.  Sum- 
ner  was  sorely  disappointed,  for  he  had  relied  with 
confidence  upon  senatorial  courtesy  to  secure  him 
a  hearing.  But  now  the  disillusionment  was  com 
plete  :  "You  may  speak  next  term,"  said  Mason 
to  him.  "  I  must  speak  this  term,"  was  his  reply. 
"  By  -  — ,  you  shan't!"  retorted  Mason.  "I 
will,  and  you  can't  prevent  me  !  "  was  Suinner's  re 
joinder.  But  he  now  saw  that  he  could  secure  a 
hearing  only  in  case  he  could  claim  it  as  a  right, 
not  as  a  privilege.  This  first  failure  called  forth 
fresh  taunts  from  the  Whig  press,  while  the  Free 
Sellers  began  to  abandon  hope  that  Sum  ner  would 
get  the  floor  before  the  end  of  the  session,  and 
Wilson  and  Parker  wrote  most  urgent  letters,  em 
phasizing  how  serious  the  consequences  of  such 
failure  must  be,  both  for  him  and  for  the  cause  they 
all  had  at  heart.  But  Sumner  was  convinced  that 
his  course  was  the  wise  one :  had  he  introduced  a 
bill,  he  could  have  spoken  only  by  unanimous  con 
sent;  he  therefore  proposed  "to  throw  himself  upon 
the  majority  and  to  compel  them  to  the  ignoble 
position  before  the  country  of  suppressing  de 
bate."  l 

When  these  friendly  but  urgent  promptings 
reached  him,  only  three  weeks  of  the  session  yet  re 
mained.  Sumner  was  on  the  alert  and  his  plan 
well  formed.  Finally,  only  five  days  before  the 
end  of  the  nine-months  session,  his  opportunity 
1  Letter  to  E.  L.  Pierce,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  292. 


148  CHARLES  SUMNER 

came.  On  the  26th  of  August,  Huuter  of  Virginia, 
for  the  committee  having  charge  of  the  civil  and 
diplomatic  appropriation  bill,  "moved  an  amend 
ment  for  paying  the  'extraordinary  expenses' 
incurred  by  ministerial  officers  in  executing  the 
laws."  Sumner,  by  consultation  with  the  auditor, 
had  definitely  informed  himself  in  advance  that 
among  the  charges  intended  to  be  covered  were 
some  due  to  the  enforcing  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law. 
He  therefore  moved  the  amendment:  "provided, 
that  no  such  allowance  shall  be  authorized  for  any 
expenses  incurred  in  executing  the  Act  of  Septem 
ber  18,  1850,  for  the  surrender  of  fugitives  from 
service  or  labor,  which  Act  is  hereby  repealed," 
and  instantly  took  the  floor  to  speak  to  his  motion. 
He  reminded  his  colleagues  that  he  had  sought  an 
earlier  opportunity,  which  had  been  denied  him, 
but  that  at  last  he  was  to  be  heard,  not  as  a  favor, 
but  as  a  right.1 

From  the  outset,  Sumner  made  it  evident  that  the, 
restraints  of  personal  ambition  or  of  party  ex 
pediency,  which  had  silenced  or  diverted  so  many 
others,  would  not  constrain  him. 

"Sir,  I  have  never  been  a  politician.     The  slave 

jf  principles,  I  call  no  party  master.     .     .     .     By  no 

effort,  by  no  desire  of  my  own,   I  find  myself  a 

senator  of  the  United  States.     Never  before  have  I 

held  public  office  of  any  kind." 

1U  Freedom  National,  Slavery  Sectional,"  Works.  Vol  III, 
pp.  87-197. 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS  149 

Boldly  assailing  the  dictum  of  finality  of  the 
Compromise  measures,  which  the  conventions  of 
both  the  great  parties  had  recently  affirmed,  he 
pointed  out  that  the  Fathers  expressly  provided 
that  the  Constitution,  the  supreme  law  of  the  laud, 
should  have  its  prescribed  process  of  amendment. 
"  Nothing  from  man's  hand  is  final.  Truth  alone 
is  final."  He  denounced  this  doctrine  of  finality  as 
not  only  inconsistent  and  absurd,  but  as  tyrannical 
in  its  attempted  suppression  of  free  speech  j  yet,  he 
declared,  it  was  as  impotent  as  it  was  tyrannical. 

"Convictions  of  the  heart  cannot  be  repressed. 
Utterances  of  conscience  must  be  heard.  They 
break  forth  with  irrepressible  might.  As  well 
attempt  to  check  the  tides  of  ocean,  the  currents  of 
the  Mississippi,  or  the  rushing  waters  of  Niagara. 
The  discussion  of  slavery  will  proceed,  wherever  two 
or  three  are  gathered  together, — by  the  fireside,  on 
the  highway,  at  the  public  meeting,  in  the  church. 
The  movement  against  slavery  is  from  the  Everlast 
ing  Arm.  Even  now  it  is  gathering  its  forces,  soon 
to  be  confessed  everywhere.  It  may  not  be  felt  yet 
in  the  high  places  of  office  and  power,  but  all  who 
can  put  their  ears  humbly  to  the  ground,  will  hear 
and  comprehend  its  incessant  and  advancing  tread." 

For  years  the  apologists  for  slavery  had  been 
decrying  any  attempt  to  curb  its  advance  as  an 
aggression  on  the  part  of  the  North.  In  bold  chal 
lenge  of  this  assumption,  Sumner  declared:  "Ac 
cording  to  the  true  spirit  of  the  Constitution  and  the 
sentiments  of  the  Fathers,  slavery  and  not  freedom, 
is  sectional,  while  freedom,  and  not  slavery,  is  na- 


150  CHAKLES  SUMNEE 

tional."  In  upholding  this  thesis,  he  first  contended 
that  slavery  was  of  such  offensive  character — "so 
eminent,  so  transcendent,  so  tyrannical,  so  unjust" 
— that  it  could  find  sanction  only  in  positive  law  ; 
that  it  found  no  such  positive  sanction  in  the  Con 
stitution,  which  (in  the  light  of  the  Convention's 
Debates,  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  the 
Address  of  the  Continental  Congress)  must  be  in 
terpreted  openly,  actively  and  perpetually  for 
freedom  ;  that  at  the  time  when  Washington  first 
became  President,  "  slavery  had  no  national  power, 
existed  nowhere  on  the  national  territory,  bepeath 
the  national  flag,  but  was  openly  condemned  by  the 
nation,  church,  colleges  and  literature  of  the  time." 
In  support  of  these  assertions,  he  brought  forward  a 
great  mass  of  evidence,— none  of  it  more  telling  than 
the  words  in  condemnation  of  slavery  and  in  favor 
of  "the  sacred  cause"  of  emancipation  from  the 
lips  of  the  three  great  Virginians,  the  Father  of  his 
Country,  the  Author  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde 
pendence,  and  the  Orator  of  Liberty.  He  laid 
especial  emphasis  upon  the  words  of  the  Amend 
ment :  "  No  person  shall  be  deprived  of  life,  liberty 
or  property,  without  due  process  of  law,"  insisting 
that  the  convention's  rejection  of  a  restriction  of 
this  guaranty  to  freemen  instead  of  "persons" 
(which  he  proved  was  explicit  and  deliberate) 
carried  with  it  "an  express  guaranty  of  personal 
liberty,  and  an  express  prohibition  of  its  invasion 
anywhere,  at  least  within  the  national  jurisdiction." 
But  Suniuer  reserved  most  of  his  strength  for  an 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS  151 

arraignment  of  the  " Fugitive  Slave  Bill,"—  for  so 
he  always  meant  to  term  it,  never  conceding  that 
it  had  the  force  of  valid  law.  Suinner  first  exposed 
the  falsity  of  the  assertion  that  the  provision  of  the 
Constitution,  which  was  claimed  as  its  basis,  was 
one  to  which  any  especial  importance  had  been 
attached,  still  less  that  it  had  been  one  of  the  great 
compromises  on  which  had  hinged  the  fate  of  the 
Constitution,  i  He  showed  that  it  appeared  in  none 
of  the  seveu*plaus  or  drafts  j  that  there  was  no  sug 
gestion  of  such  a  provision  till  almost  the  very  end 
of  the  sessions  when,  with  little  preliminary  con 
sideration,  a  clause  for  the  surrender  of  "  persons 
bound  to  service  or  labor"  was  moved,  and  adopted 
without  debate  or  opposition  of  any  kind.  He 
pointed  out  that  in  the  debates  over  the  ratification 
of  the  Constitution,  this  vague  provision  aroused 
little  comment,  and  was  variously  interpreted,  a 
Virginian  declaring  that  it  contained  l  i  no  security 
of  property."  The  fugitive  slave  law  of  1793  had 
attracted  little  attention ;  although  it  had  been 
rarely  enforced,  and  sometimes  u  gloriously  refused 
compliance"  in  Northern  states,  nevertheless  the 
one  attempt  (1817-18)  to  amend  it  so  as  to  pro 
vide  more  effectively  by  law  for  the  reclaiming 
of  slaves,  had  been  dropped,  so  that  the  Act  of  1793 
had  stood  unchanged  till  1850. 
Approaching  this  notorious  measure,  Sumner  said  : 

"As  I  read  this  statute,  I  am  filled  with  painful 
emotions.  The  masterly  subtlety  with  which  it  is 
drawn  might  challenge  admiration,  if  exerted  fora 


152  CHAKLES  SUMMER 

benevolent  purpose ;  but  in  an  age  of  sensibility 
and  refinement,  a  machine  of  torture,  however  skil 
ful  and  apt,  cannot  be  regarded  without  horror. 
Sir,  in  the  name  of  the  Constitution,  which  it  vio 
lates,  of  my  Country,  which  it  dishonors,  of  Human 
ity,  which  it  degrades,  of  Christianity,  which  it 
offends,  I  arraign  this  enactment,  and  now  hold  it 
up  to  the  judgment  of  the  Senate  and  the  world. 
Again,  I  shrink  from  no  responsibility.  I  may 
seem  to  stand  alone ;  but  all  the  patriots  and 
martyrs  of  history,  all  the  Fathers  of  the  Bepublic, 
are  with  me.  Sir,  there  is  no  attribute  of  God 
which  does  not  take  part  against  this  Act." 

Meeting  the  objection  that  the  fugitive  slave  law 
of  1793  had  been  sustained  by  the  Supreme  Court, 
Sumner  cited  instances  where  that  Court  had  re 
versed  its  own  precedents.  While  he  declared  its 
decisions  entitled  to  great  consideration,  he  never 
theless  gave  his  approval  to  Jackson's  dictum  that 
"each  public  officer  who  takes  an  oath  to  support 
the  Constitution  swears  that  he  will  support  it  as  he 
understands  it,  and  not  as  it  is  understood  by 
others."  He  maintained  that  the  fugitive  slave 
clause,  as  some  called  it,  was  merely  an  article  of 
compact  between  the  states,  and  that  since  the  Con 
stitution  did  not  accompany  this  by  any  grant 
of  power  (as  it  did  in  the  clause,  similar  in  form, 
relating  to  the  proving  of  state  acts  and  records) 
this  silence  should  be  interpreted  as  indicating  the 
convention's  intent  that  no  such  power  should  be 
granted.  He  therefore  denounced  the  Act  not  only 
as  an  unwarrantable  assumption  of  power  by  the 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS  153 

nation,  but  as  aii  iufractiou  of  the  rights  reserved  to 
the  states.1 

He  next  attacked  the  law  as  radically  unconstitu 
tional  because  of  its  denial  of  trial  by  jury. 

ulf  the  language  of  the  Constitution  were  open  to 
doubt ,  which  it  is  not,  still  all  the  presumptions  of 
law,  all  the  leanings  of  Freedom,  all  the  suggestions 
of  justice,  plead  augel-tougued  for  this  right.  No 
body  doubts  that  Congress,  if  it  legislates  on  this 
matter,  may  allow  a  trial  by  jury.  But  if  it  may,  so 
overwhelming  is  the  claim  of  justice,  it  MUST." 

He  pointed  out  that  the  Stamp  Act  had  been  op 
posed  by  the  Fathers  for  precisely  the  reasons  now 
urged  against  this :  that  it  was  a  usurpation  by 
Parliament  of  powers  which  did  not  belong  to  it, 
and  an  infraction  of  rights  reserved  to  the  Colonies, 
and  that  it  was  a  denial  of  trial  by  jury  in  certain 
cases  of  property. 

"Sir,  in  placing  the  Stamp  Act  by  the  side  of  the 
Slave  Act,  I  do  injustice  to  that  emanation  of  Brit 
ish  tyranny.  Both  infringe  important  rights  :  one, 
of  property  ;  the  other,  the  vital  right  of  all,  which 

1  It  has  been  well  noted  that  Snmner  and  other  Free  Sellers, 
in  their  eagerness  to  find  constitutional  justification  for  the 
defense  of  national  legislation  against  slavery,  took  almost  the 
same  ground  as  did  secessionist  pro-slavery  men  in  asserting  the 
compact  theory  of  the  Constitution,  and  the  reserved  rights  of 
the  states.  In  comment  on  Sumner's  argument  that  "the 
fugitive  servant  clause  of  the  Constitution  was  a  clause  of  com 
pact  between  the  states,  and  conferred  no  legislative  power 
upon  Congress,"  Salmon  P.  Chase  said  :  "  I  avow  my  convic 
tion,  now  and  here,  that  logically  and  historically  his  argument 
is  impregnable,  entirely  impregnable." 


164  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

is  to  other  rights  as  soul  to  body — the  right  of  a  man 
to  himself.  .  .  .  As  Freedom  is  more  than  prop 
erty,  as  man  is  above  the  dollar  that  he  owns,  as 
heaven,  to  which  we  all  aspire,  is  higher  than  earth, 
where  every  accumulation  of  wealth  must  ever  re 
main,  so  are  the  rights  assailed  by  the  American 
Congress  higher  than  those  once  assailed  by  the 
British  Parliament.  And  just  in  this  degree  must 
history  condemn  the  Slave  Act  more  than  the  Stamp 
Act." 

Sumner  next  laid  stress  upon  the  contention  that, 
even  if  the  Act  were  constitutional,  it  lacked  "that 
essential  support  in  the  Public  Conscience  of  States, 
where  it  is  to  be  enforced,  which  is  the  life  of  all 
laws,  and  without  which  any  law  must  be  a  dead 
letter."  And  he  quoted  with  great  effect  a  thereto 
fore  unpublished  letter  from  Washington  to  the  col 
lector  at  Portsmouth,  whither  one  of  his  slaves  had 
escaped.  Although  expressing  his  own  wish  and 
that  of  Mrs.  Washington  that  the  slave  be  returned, 
he  added  that  he  did  not  mean  that  "  violent  meas 
ures  should  be  used,  as  would  excite  a  mob  or  riot — 
which  might  be  the  case  if  she  has  adherents — or 
even  uneasy  sensations  in  the  minds  of  well-disposed 
citizens.  Bather  than  either  of  these  should  happen, 
I  would  forego  her  services  altogether  ;  and  the  ex 
ample,  also,  which  is  of  infinite  more  importance. "  l 

u  But  [Sumuer  pointed  out]  with  every  attempt 
to  administer  the  Slave  Act,  it  constantly  becomes 
more  revolting,  particularly  in  its  influence  on  the 
agents  it  enlists.  Pitch  cannot  be  touched  without 

1  Works,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  178. 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS  155 

defilement,  and  all  who  lend  themselves  to  this  work 
seem  at  once  to  lose  the  better  part  of  num.  The 
spirit  of  the  law  passes  into  them,  as  the  devils  en 
tered  the  swine.  .  .  .  Not  a  case  occurs  which  does 
not  harrow  the  souls  of  good  men,  and  bring  tears  of 
sympathy  to  the  eyes,  and  those  nobler  tears  which 
'patriots  shed  o'er  dying  laws."  "Even  in  the 
lands  of  Slavery,  the  slave-trader  is  loathed  as  an 
ignoble  character,  from  whom  the  countenance  is 
turned  away  ;  and  can  the  slave-hunter  be  more  re 
garded,  while  pursuing  his  prey  in  a  laud  of  free 
dom  !" 

The  conclusion  of  his  speech  was  devoted  to  a 
solemn  appeal  : 

"The  Slave  Act  violates  the  Constitution,  and 
shocks  the  Public  Conscience.  With  modesty,  and 
yet  with  firmness,  let  me  add,  sir,  it  offends  against 
the  Divine  Law.  No  such  enactment  is  entitled  to 
support.  The  conscience  of  each  person  is  the  final 
arbiter.  Not  rashly  would  I  set  myself  against  any 
argument  of  law.  This  grave  responsibility  I  would 
not  lightly  assume.  But  here  the  path  of  duty  is 
clear.  By  the  Supreme  Law,  which  commands  me  to 
do  no  injustice,  by  the  comprehensive  Christian  Law 
of  Brotherhood,  by  the  Constitution  which  I  have  sworn 

to     Support,     I    AM    BOUND    TO    DISOBEY  THIS    ACT. 

Never  in  any  capacity,  can  I  render  voluntary  aid  in 
its  execution.  Pains  and  penalties  I  will  endure,  but 
this  great  wrong  I  will  not  do.  ...  Finally, 
sir,  for  the  sake  of  peace  and  tranquillity,  cease  to 
shock  the  Public  Conscience  ;  for  the  sake  of  the 
Constitution,  cease  to  exercise  a  power  nowhere 
granted,  and  which  violates  inviolable  rights  ex 
pressly  secured.  .  .  .  Eepeal  this  enactment.  Let 
its  terrors  no  longer  rage  through  the  land.  Mindful 
of  the  lowly  whom  it  pursues,  mindful  of  the  good 


156  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

men  perplexed  by  its  requirements,  in  the  name  of 
charity,  in  the  name  of  the  Constitution,  repeal  this 
enactment,  totally  and  without  delay." 

Sumner  had  been  speaking  for  three  and  three- 
quarter  hours.  Meantime  the  galleries  had  filled. 
Webster,  himself,  was  an  attentive  listener  for  an 
hour  or  more,  this  being,  it  is  said,  his  last  visit  to 
the  Senate  chamber.  Sumner  was  not  interrupted, 
but  no  sooner  had  he  ceased  speaking  than  the  abuse 
began.  Clemens  of  Alabama  expressed  the  hope 
that  none  of  his  friends  would  make  any  reply  to 
the  speech,  "  which  the  senator  from  Massachusetts 
has  seen  fit  to  inflict  upon  the  Senate,"  adding  :  "  I 
shall  only  say,  sir,  that  the  ravings  of  a  maniac  may 
sometimes  be  dangerous,  but  the  barking  of  a  puppy 
never  did  any  harm."  Not  till,  later  in  the  debate, 
he  referred  to  the  other  senator  from  Massachusetts 
as  "one  who  has  the  fortune  to  be  a  gentleman, 
which  his  colleague  has  not,"  was  he  called  to  order. 
Badger  of  North  Carolina  took  upon  himself  the 
burden  of  replying  in  behalf  of  the  Southern  sena 
tors.  He  quoted  at  length  from  Sumner' s  Faneuil 
Hall  speech,  and  sought  to  make  Sumner  respon 
sible  for  sedition.  He  did  not  hesitate  to  suggest 
with  a  sneer  that  to  Southern  senators  further  asso 
ciation  with  the  author  of  such  a  speech  might  not 
be  agreeable.1  Weller  of  California  characterized 

1  It  is  creditable  to  both  of  these  men  that  in  later  years  they 
came  to  regret  profoundly  their  gross  abuse  on  this  occasion. 
Badger  was  quite  melted  by  Sumner's  characteristic  magna 
nimity,  the  following  year,  in  supporting  both  by  speech  and 
by  vote  his  nomination  for  the  Supreme  Court. 


SENATE  BEGINNINGS  157 

Suinuer's  speech  as  inflammatory,  and  indirectly,  at 
least,  counseling  forcible  resistance.  This  Sumner 
earnestly  denied.  Quite  a  number  of  senators,  in 
cluding  three  from  New  England,  'spoke  in  opposi 
tion  to  Suinuers  amendment,  while  Douglas  and 
Dodge  took  a  positive  stand  in  defense  of  the  con 
stitutionality  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act. 

The  only  men  who  came  to  Sumner7  s  support 
were  his  two  Free  Soil  colleagues.  Hale  declared 
that  Suinner  had  that  day  placed  himself  side  by 
side  with  the  first  orators  of  antiquity,  and  as  far 
ahead  of  any  living  American  orator  as  freedom  is 
ahead  of  slavery.  Chase  affirmed  his  entire  agree 
ment  with  Sumuer's  interpretations  of  the  Constitu 
tion,  and  declared  that  this  speech  would  "  mark  a 
new  era  in  American  history." 

Sumner' s  amendment  secured  but  three  votes  be 
sides  his  own, — those  of  Chase,  Hale  and  Wade. 
His  own  colleague  was  among  those  who  dodged  the 
vote,  as  did  also  Seward,  while  Fish  and  four 
New  England  senators  were  among  the  forty-seven 
who  openly  voted  against  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law.  It  is  interesting  that  the  first  note  of 
congratulation  to  reach  Sumner  should  have  been  a 
most  cordial  one  from  Mrs.  Fish,  soon  followed  by 
a  sympathetic  and  encouraging  letter  from  Mrs. 
Seward.  Seward,  himself,  wrote  to  Sumner  that 
his  speech  was  "an  admirable,  a  great,  a  very 
great  one." 

The  meaning  and  effect  of  Sumner' s  speech  are 
not  to  be  gauged  by  its  failure  to  convert  a  single 


158  CHARLES  SUMNER 

politician  or  compromiser  to  vote  for  the  repeal  of 
the  law.  Chase  caught  its  immense  significance 
when  he  said  that  it  marked  the  day  when  the  ad 
vocates  of  the  restriction  of  slavery,  "no  longer 
content  to  stand  on  the  defensive  in  the  contest  with 
slavery,  boldly  attacked  the  very  citadel  of  its 
power  in  that  doctrine  of  finality,  which  two  of  the 
political  parties  of  the  country,  through  their 
national  organizations,  are  endeavoring  to  estab 
lish  as  the  impregnable  defense  of  its  usurpations." 
Theodore  Parker's  hope  had  been  realized:  here 
was  "  the  senator  with  a  conscience," — a  man  whom 
no  sneers  or  threats  could  silence,  who  owned  no 
allegiance  to  party  or  to  boss,  who  held  office-seek 
ing  expediency  in  contempt,  and  who  would  speak 
what  he  believed  to  be  the  truth  not  in  mincing 
phrases  but  with  all  his  titantic  power  of  denuncia 
tion.  Well  might  Horace  Mann  write  home  to 
Massachusetts:  "The  26th  of  August,  1852,  re 
deemed  the  7th  of  March,  1850." 


CHAPTER  IX 

POLITICAL  REVOLUTION   IN   MASSACHUSETTS 

FOR  the  eighteen  months  following  this  speech 
of  Sumner's,  the  chief  interest  passes  from  Congress 
to  the  struggles  connected  with  the  national  elec 
tion  of  1852  and  with  the  seething  political  elements 
in  Massachusetts. 

In  the  months  preceding  the  national  conventions, 
there  had  been  much  anxious  discussion  among 
Free  Soilers  as  to  the  course  which  they  should 
pursue.  Sumner's  counsel  had  been  for  absolute 
independence,  without  the  least  commitment,  until 
they  could  act  with  knowledge.  But  when  both 
parties  had  pledged  themselves  to  acceptance  of  the 
finality  of  the  Compromise,  his  message  to  Massa 
chusetts  friends  of  Freedom  was  to  uphold  her  sup 
porters,  and  leave  the  result  to  Providence.  The 
Free  Soilers  nominated  John  P.  Hale,  but  through 
out  the  country  the  campaign  lacked  spirit,  and  in 
Massachusetts  the  Free  Soil  vote  fell  off  more  than 
twenty-five  per  cent.  The  state  election  followed 
the  national  almost  immediately.  For  two  years  the 
Bay  State  Free  Soilers  had  cooperated  with  the  Dem 
ocrats,  with  tangible  results  in  state  and  national 
elections.  But  in  the  midst  of  a  presidential  cam 
paign,  where  the  platforms  and  presidential  candi 
dates  were  pledged  to  "  finality,"  it  was  not  likely 


160  CHAKLES  SUMNEB 

that  local  coalition  would  prove  so  feasible  as  in 
former  years.  At  the  Free  Soil  convention,  hardly  a 
fortnight  after  Sumner' s  epoch-making  speech,  he 
was  greeted  with  great  enthusiasm.  In  his  address 
he  emphasized  strongly  the  frequent  necessity  of 
third  parties  and  the  high  service  which  they  may 
render. 

'  The  Free  Soilers  entered  upon  the  campaign  with 
hopes  of  securing  further  gains  both  at  home  and 
in  Congress,  but  they  found  the  Democrats  little 
disposed  to  coalition,  and  the  unpopularity  of  the 
' t  Maine  law '  >  which  had  been  enacted  with  strong 
support  from  the  Free  Soilers,  now  reacted  against 
them.  The  outcome  was  the  loss  of  the  legislature 
by  about  ten  members,  and  this  involved  also  the 
loss  of  United  States  senator  and  of  the  state  offices 
which  were  to  be  filled  by  the  legislature.  For  this 
disaster  not  a  little  of  the  blame  was  with  consider 
able  justice  visited  upon  Sumner,  who,  after  his 
speech  at  the  convention,  had  gone  upon  visits  out 
of  the  state,  entirely  absenting  himself  from  the 
campaign.  Sumner  had  little  facility  in  extem 
poraneous  speech  or  in  recasting  his  thought, 
which  he  had  once  elaborated,  and  it  is  believed 
that  he  was  reluctant  to  take  the  stump,  when  he 
had  so  recently  fully  delivered  his  views.  Never 
theless,  his  official  position  and  his  unrivaled  elo 
quence  would  have  counted  for  much ;  as  he  grew 
more  experienced  in  politics,  he  came  to  regard 
^himself  as  subject  to  draft,  whenever  his  service 
was  needed  to  promote  the  cause  he  had  at  heart. 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     1G1 

The  Whigs,  in  whose  hands  the  election  had 
placed  the  naming  of  Simmer's  future  colleague  in 
the  Senate,  promptly  chose  Edward  Everett,  a 
selection  as  acceptable  to  Sumner  and  the  Free 
Soilers  as  that  of  any  compromise  Whig  could  be. 
J^  Although  Democrats  and  Free  Soilers  failed  in 
their  attempt  at  cooperation  for  the  election  of  of 
ficers  in  1852,  they  nevertheless  carried  to  success  a 
cause  in  which  their  interests  were  better  united, — 
the  call  for  a  convention  to  revise  the  Constitution 
of  the  commonwealth.  Upon  this  issue  they  were 
opposed  by  the  solid  Whig  vote,  for  one  of  the 
chief  objects  for  which  revision  was  urged  was  to 
remedy  the  system  of  representation  which  worked 
to  the  unfair  advantage  of  the  Whigs.1  An  ener 
getic  campaign  resulted  in  the  election  of  a  conven 
tion  made  up  of  delegates  of  unusual  ability.  The 
Free  Soil  representation  was  exceptionally  strong  : 
towns  were  allowed  to  elect  non-residents,  and  Henry 
Wilson  did  expert  work  in  suggesting  men  of  force 
and  prominence  for  towns  where  Whigs  might  pos 
sibly  be  defeated.  It  was  in  this  way  that,  without 
having  been  consulted  and  somewhat  to  his  annoy 
ance,  Sunnier  found  himself  the  Free  Soil  candi 
date  for  Marshfield,  pitted  against  Fletcher  Webster, 
the  son  of  the  great  statesman  who  had  died  but  a 
few  weeks  before.  His  election  by  a  vote  of  more 
than  five  to  two  was  intended  as  an  indication  that  the 
Compromise  was  repudiated  in  Webster' sown  town. 

Sumner  was  chairman  of  an  important  committee 

1  Supra,  p.  126. 


162  CHARLES  SUMNMB 

of  the  convention,  but  did  not  take  a  very  active 
part  in  its  debates,  except  upon  the  fundamental 
question  of  the  basis  of  representation.  The  coali 
tion  leaders  advocated  a  compromise  measure,  which 
would  make  numerical  inequality  favor  small  towns, 
instead  of  overweighting  the  large  cities,  as  the  old- 
system  had  done.  Such  twistings  of  institutions  to 
suit  temporary  partisan  advantage  did  not  appeal  to 
Sunnier,  and  he  made  a  vigorous  argument  in  favor 
of  a  simple  district  system,  which  would  ensure 
equality  of  representation  to  the  voters  of  the  com 
monwealth.  His  plan  met  with  little  favor,  and  he 
finally  supported  the  one  already  proposed,  since  it 
was  a  long  step  toward  fairness  in  the  districting  of 
cities.  Consistent  with  his  recent  argument  in  the 
Senate  against  the  finality  of  any  human  law,  Sum- 
ner  secured  the  inclusion,  among  the  propositions  to 
be  voted  upon  by  the  people,  of  a  provision  requir 
ing  the  legislature,  upon  the  request  of  the  towns  or 
cities  containing  not  less  than  one-third  of  the  legal 
voters  of  the  commonwealth,  to  submit  to  popular 
vote  the  question  whether  a  convention  should  be 
called  for  the  purpose  of  revising  the  Constitution. 

The  advocates  of  the  new  Constitution  entered 
upon  the  fall  campaign  with  high  hopes,  for  they 
had  had  a  majority  of  10,000  in  calling  the  conven 
tion  and  its  work  had  been  of  great  merit.  The 
Free  Soilers  put  Wilson  in  nomination  for  governor 
and  began  a  well-planned  and  sharply  contested  cam 
paign.  Profiting  by  the  criticism  of  the  previous 
year,  Sunmer  took  upon  himself  his  full  share  of  the 


KE VOLUTION  IX  MASSACHUSETTS     163 

work.  He  went  to  seventeen  of  the  largest  cities 
and  towns  of  the  state,  and  his  arguments  were  con 
sidered  the  most  effective  of  the  whole  contest.  He 
usually  spoke  for  nearly  three  hours,  discussing  and 
explaining  the  proposed  changes  in  the  Constitution 
and  especially  emphasizing  the  needed  improvement 
in  the  basis  of  representation.  Nor  did  he  hesitate 
to  inject  into  this  speech  his  favorite  anti-slaveryN 
doctrines. 

But  the  new  Constitution  and  the  coalition  were 
foredoomed  to  failure.  Unexpected  obstacles  and 
foes  appeared.  Not  only  did  the  Whigs  as  a  body 
oppose  the  new  Constitution  but  their  zeal  was 
quickened  by  the  unlooked-for  support  of  Adams 
and  Palfrey  who  now  came  out  against  the  work  of 
the  convention.  From  Washington  came  what  was 
known  as  "Cushing's  ukase," — a  letter  from  the 
Attorney-General  virtually  forbidding,  under  pain 
of  the  administration's  disfavor,  any  cooperation  of 
Democrats  with  Free  Soilers.  For  the  first  time, 
too,  the  Irish  vote  was  made  a  prominent  factor  in  a 
Massachusetts  campaign.  The  strength  of  that  na 
tionality  was  largely  centred  in  Boston,  and  hence 
was  enlisted  (under  the  positive  intervention  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  as  Sumner  charged)  against  a  meas 
ure  which  would  have  cut  down  the  relative  political 
influence  of  that  city.  The  unpopular  liquor  law 
again  proved  a  divisive  factor.  The  result  was  that 
the  new  Constitution  was  defeated  by  nearly  5,000 
votes,  and  the  Whigs  carried  the  election  of  the 
legislature,  thus  ensuring  also  the  defeat  of  Wilson. 


CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

JFor  Sumner,  himself,  the  year  had  not  been  with-^ 
t  its  gains.  In  the  constitutional  convention  he 
had  made  the  acquaintance  of  leading  men  from  all 
over  the  state,  and  they  had  found  him  not  a  mere 
anti-slavery  fanatic,  as  he  had  been  pictured,  but  an 
-^-affable,  well-informed  man  and  a  tireless  worker. 
In  the  ensuing  campaign  he  had  commended  himself 
to  the  people  in  all  parts  of  the  state,  not  more  by 
his  eloquence  than  by  his  sagacious  and  persuasive 
discussion  of  matters  of  home  politics.  Neverthe 
less,  the  outlook  was  far  from  bright.  Further  coali 
tion  between  Democrats  and  Free  Soilers  in  Massa 
chusetts  was  not  to  be  looked  for,  after  the  disastrous 
failure  of  this  campaign.  The  insolence  of  the 
Whigs  over  their  unhoped-for  victory  knew  no 
bounds.  Though  Sumner' s  term  had  yet  four  years 
to  run,  the  Whig  journals  began  to  call  upon  him  to 
resign,  declaring  that  he  no  longer  had  any  constit 
uency  back  of  him.  They  were  merciless  in  their 
taunts.  Said  one  prominent  Free  Soiler  :  "  Which 
ever  way  we  go,  we  are  jeered,  hissed,  pointed  at 
and  spit  upon  by  Whiggery."  Upon  Wilson  in 
particular  they  poured  out  their  gibes.  His  career 
was  apparently  at  an  end,  and  he  was  forced  to  re 
sume  his  unsuccessful  attempts  at  shoe-manufactur 
ing,  despondent  of  the  future. 

Among  these  exultant  Whigs,  who  would  have 
listened  to  a  Cassandra  prophecy  that  the  national 
Whig  party  was  doomed  to  speedy  disruption,  that 
only  a  twelvemonth  later  in  Massachusetts  the  now 
triumphant  Whig  organization  would  suffer  polit- 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     165 

ical  annihilation,  aiid  that  this  derided  Heury  Wil 
son  would  then  be  sent  to  the  Senate  as  Simmer's 
loyal  fellow-worker,  and  put  in  line  for  the  Vice- 
Presidency  of  the  United  States  ! 
C    Sunnier' s  second  session  in  the  Senate  (December, 
(1852,   to  March,  1853),  had  been  of  little  interest. 
I  At   its  beginning,   the  names  of  Hale,  Chase  and  v 
\  Suinner  were  omitted  from  the  committee-list  upon 
(  the  express  ground  that  they  were  ' '  outside  of  any 
C,  healthy  political  organization."     As  questions  re 
lating  to  slavery  were  held  in  abeyance  in  these 
closing  months  of  a  defeated  administration,  Sum- 
ner  took  no  very  active  part  in  the  routine  work  of 
the  Senate,  not  yet  being  ready  to  adopt  the  repeated  - — 
advice  which  Chase  gave  him,  to  "  take  off  his  coat 
and  go  into  the  every-day  fight."         /£V3 

At  the  beginning  of  the  next  Congress, — the  first 
of  Pierce' s  administration, — Chase  and  Sumner  were 
the  only  Free  Soilers  in  the  Senate.  The  Demo 
crats,  in  arranging  the  majority  representation  upon 
committees,  recognized  Chase,  but  in  the  Whig 
caucus  Se ward's  motion  to  assign  Sumner  to  certain 
committees  was  blocked  by  the  opposition  of  his 
new  colleague,  Everett,  who  deprecated  any  action 
which  would  "  recognize  him  as  a  Whig."  The 
result  was  that  the  Democrats  placed  Sumner  in 
vacancies  left  by  the  Whigs  in  the  Committees  on 
Pensions  and  Enrolled  Bills. 

There  was  every  prospect  that  the  session  would 
be  marked  by  little  of  interest.  Acquiescence  in 
the  finality  of  the  Compromise,  pledged  by  both 


166  CHAKLES  8UMNEE 

great  parties,  was  undoubtedly  expected  and  desired 
by  a  large  majority  of  the  members  of  Congress. 
Yet  hardly  were  the  holidays  past  when  the  whole 
slavery  issue  was  opened  up,  never  again  to  be  closed 
till  wreck  of  parties  and  civil  war  had  wrought  out 
a  solution  far  different  from  that  sought  by  the 
anxious  compromisers  of  1850.  The  responsibility 
for  this  step,  so  big  with  consequences,  rests  upon 
Stephen  A.  Douglas,  who  as  chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Territories,  on  January  4,  1854,  presented 
a  report  upon  the  bill  for  the  establishment  of  the 
territory  of  Nebraska,  which  included  the  provision 
that  the  status  of  slavery  in  this  region, — dedicated 
to  Freedom,  in  accordance  with  the  Missouri 
Compromise, — should  be  determined  by  the  people 
of  the  territory,  its  admission  to  statehood  being 
pledged  "with  or  without  slavery,"  as  they  might 
decide.  The  motive  for  this  gratuitous  open 
ing  of  the  slavery  question  can  hardly  be  found 
elsewhere  than  in  Douglas's  desire  to  commend  him 
self  strongly  to  the  South,  in  anticipation  of  the 
election  of  1856.  The  hint  was  eagerly  taken  up 
by  the  Southern  leaders  who  saw  a  chance  of  secur 
ing  what  they  had  supposed  far  beyond  their  grasp. 
It  is  not  necessary  here  to  review  the  various  modifi 
cations  made  in  this  measure  by  its  friends,  all 
in  the  direction  of  a  more  aggressive  attack  upon 
what  for  a  generation  had  been  regarded  as  a 
solemn  compact.  Early  in  February  the  proposi 
tion  took  the  form  of  a  new  bill,  providing  for  two 
territories,  Kansas  and  Nebraska,  and  declaring  the 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     167 

prohibition  of  slavery  north  of  36°  30'  (1820)  "  in 
operative  and  void"  because  inconsistent  with  the 
provisions  of  the  legislation  of  1850. 

Sunnier  had  promptly  met  the  first  amendment 
repudiating  that  prohibition  by  a  counter  amend 
ment  explicitly  precluding  any  weakening  of  that 
barrier.  The  true  nature  and  effect  of  the  measure 
was  not  generally  understood,  and  its  sponsors  were 
urging  its  speedy  enactment.  Suniner  therefore  ^ 
joined  with  Chase  and  with  four  members  of  the 
House  in  issuing  the  "  Appeal  of  the  Independent 
Democrats  in  Congress  to  the  people  of  the  United 
States."  It  stated  clearly  the  inevitable  effects  of 
the  proposed  Act,  "to  open  all  the  unorganized 
territory  of  the  Union  to  the  ingress  of  slavery," 
and  continued:  "We  arraign  this  bill  as  a  gross 
violation  of  a  sacred  pledge  ;  as  a  criminal  betrayal 
of  sacred  rights  ;  as  part  and  parcel  of  an  atrocious 
plot  to  exclude  from  a  vast  and  unoccupied  region 
immigrants  from  the  Old  World  and  free  laborers 
from  our  own  states,  and  convert  it  into  a  dreary 
region  of  despotism,  inhabited  by  masters  and 
slaves."  It  sketched  the  history  of  the  Missouri 
Compromise,  and  asserted  that  "not  a  man  in 
Congress,  or  out  of  Congress,  in  1850  pretended  that 
the  compromise  measures  would  repeal  the  Missouri^- 
prohibition."  It  summoned  the  friends  of  Freedom 
at  once  to  "protest  against  this  enormous  crime."  l 

Chase  took  the  lead  in  putting  forth  this  appeal, 

1  See  Rhodes,  History  of  the  United  States  from  the  Compromise 
of  1850,  Vol.  I,  pp.  441-444. 


168  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

which  had  immense  effect  in  arousing  the  North. 
It  was  Chase,  also,  who  was  the  foremost  champion 
of  the  North  in  the  fierce  debate  which  followed. 
But  a  heavy  part  of  the  work  devolved  upon  the 
two  senators  from  Massachusetts.  It  was  a  task 
which  Edward  Everett  found  far  from  congenial. 
He  had  entered  the  Senate,  a  few  months  before, 
full  of  enthusiasm  for  the  new  career,  in  the  expecta 
tion  that  the  slavery  issue  had  been  permanently  re 
moved  from  that  forum.  He  was  the  intimate 
friend  and  successor  of  Webster,  and  the  representa 
tive  of  Massachusetts  Whig  conservatism.  He  did 
not  touch  this  unwelcome  topic  until  he  had  assured 
himself  that  Massachusetts  was  thoroughly  opposed 
to  the  new  measure,  and  even  then  he  spoke  in  an 
apologetic  tone  which  was  sorely  disappointing  to 
many  of  his  constituents.  Nevertheless,  his  words 
had  much  weight  as  standing  for  the  great  body  of 
Whigs  who  had  voted  for  the  Compromise  in  1850, 
but  who  had  never  considered  that  it  annulled  the 
prohibition  of  1820,  and  who  were  now  opposed  to 
the  Kansas- Nebraska  Bill.  This  speech,  represent 
ing  the  attitude  of  men  who  had  reached  the  limit 
of  compromise,  influenced  many  minds  which  would 
have  remained  closed  to  the  arguments  of  radical 
leaders  in  Congress.  In  a  high-minded  but  an  un- 
aggressive  address  Seward  took  his  stand  with  the 
opponents  of  the  meaSure.  Later  in  the  month, 
Sumner  got  the  floor.  To  a  greater  extent  than 
the  other  speakers,  he  dwelt  upon  the  evils  of 
slavery,  so  that  Douglas  sneered  at  his  speech  as 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     169 

"a  mere  essay  on  slavery"  ;  but  he  made  clear  the 
absurdity  of  the  claim  that  the  Compromise  of  1850 
annulled  the  prohibition  of  1820,  and  drove  home 
the  charge  of  bad  faith,  inasmuch  as  this  prohibi 
tion  had  been  the  proposal  of  the  South,  which  was 
now  striving  to  repudiate  it,  while  refusing  to  per 
form  its  part  of  the  agreement.  Sumuer  had  a 
faculty  for  coining  telling  phrases.  In  this  speech 
his  reference  to  "a  Northern  man  with  Southern 
principles"  was  instantly  caught  up  by  the  crowded 
galleries,  and  figured  prominently  in  later  cam 
paigns.  In  his  reply,  Douglas  showed  that  he  con 
sidered  himself  hit  by  that  phrase.  In  Massachu 
setts  and  throughout  the  North  the  speech  met  with 
great  favor,  even  with  conservatives.  Prescott, 
wrote:  "I  don't  see  but  what  all  Boston  has  got 
round;  in  fact, we  must  call  him  [Suniner]  the  Massa 
chusetts  senator."  Nevertheless,  the  Boston  press 
still  continued  its  boycott  of  Sumner  by  excluding 
from  its  pages  this  speech  by  which,  as  even  Hil- 
lard  declared,  he  had  "  gained  credit  everywhere 
throughout  the  North." 

While  the  bill  was  pending  in  Congress,  public 
opinion  was  being  gradually  aroused  in  regard  to  it. 
In  Massachusetts  the  Free  Soilers  took  the  lead,  and 
called  a  state  convention,  which  heard  earnest 
speeches  and  passed  strong  resolutions.  The  men 
tion  of  Sumner' s  name  was  u  greeted  with  deafening 
applause."  The  legislature  also  voiced  the  protest 
of  the  state  against  the  proposed  bill.  So  deep  was 
the  feeling  throughout  the  state  that  at  the  spring 


170  CHARLES  SUMNER 

town-meetings  in  fully  half  the  towns,  after  debate 
upon  the  question  as  duly  presented  by  an  article  in 
the  warrant,  the  townsmen  by  an  almost  unanimous 
vote  declared  the  repeal  of  the  prohibition  in  the 
Missouri  Compromise  "a  perfidious  and  wicked 
act."  Unsparing  denunciation  was  hurled  at  the 
Kansas-Nebraska  Bill  from  the  pulpit.  Even  the 
"mercantile  Whigs"  of  Boston  were  at  last  stirred. 
They  assembled  in  Faneuil  Hall,  under  the  chair 
manship  of  S.  A.  Eliot,  and  Hillard  was  one  of  the 
speakers.  While  their  words  lacked  the  fervor  of 
the  Abolitionists  or  Free  Soilers,  they  were  out 
spoken  in  the  assertion  that  the  Compromise  of  1850, 
to  which  they  had  given  their  assent,  had  in  no  way 
annulled  the  prohibition  of  1820.  The  very  holding 
of  this  meeting  and  its  able  speeches  signified  that 
even  these  conservatives  had  reached  the  limit  of 
compromise,  and  had  begun  to  believe  that  in  1850 
they  had  been  swindled  into  paying  too  high  a  price 
for  a  truce  with  slavery. 

The  incident  which  aroused  most  attention  was 
the  presentation  to  Congress  of  a  petition  signed  by 
3,050  New  England  clergymen,  representing  all  de 
nominations,  protesting  "in  the  name  of  God  and 
in  His  presence"  against  the  passing  of  the  pro 
posed  bill  "as  a  great  moral  wrong,  ...  a 
breach  of  faith  eminently  unjust  to  the  moral  prin 
ciples  of  the  community,  ...  a  measure  full 
of  danger  to  the  Union,  and  exposing  us  to  the 
righteous  judgments  of  the  Almighty."  This  mon 
ster  petition,  200  feet  long,  was  taken  to  Washington, 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     171 

and,  iii  order  that  it  might  not  seein  like  a  partisan 
protest,  it  was  Everett  who  was  asked  to  bring  it 
before  the  Senate.  The  task  was  obviously  an 
unwelcome  one,  but  he  presented  the  paper  without 
delay,  calling  attention  to  the  nature  of  the  petition 
and  its  significance  because  of  the  character  of  its 
signers.  Upon  his  motion,  it  was  then  laid  upon 
the  table,  without  having  been  read.  Presently, 
however,  Douglas  called  for  a  reading  of  the  memo 
rial,  and  at  its  conclusion  he  launched  into  a  fierce 
attack  upon  the  "  political  preachers  "  and  the  iin-  \ 

^•^  ji^*^^ 

propriety  of  their  action,  an  arraignment  in  which  I 
Mason  and  Butler  followed  his  lead.  The  tone  of' 
Everett's  reply  was  almost  abject,  implying  that  he 
might  not  have  presented  the  petition,  had  he  had 
an  opportunity  to  read  it,  and  regretting  that 
what  he  had  done  from  a  sense  of  duty  should  have 
caused  hard  feeling  on  the  part  of  any  of  his  col 
leagues.  Although  he  spoke  in  terms  of  commenda 
tion  of  the  petitioners,  he  gave  the  impression  of 
wishing  to  shift  all  responsibility  for  having  ob 
truded  their  unwelcome  protest  upon  the  Senate. 
There  followed  more  coarse  abuse  from  Butler  and 
Pettit.  Sumner  longed  to  repel  this  attack,  but  ab 
stained  from  speaking  partly  out  of  a  feeling  of  del 
icacy  toward  Everett,  and  partly  at  the  urging  of 
General  Houston,  who  insisted  upon  taking  the  de 
fense  upon  himself  in  order  that  it  might  not  seem 
to  be  identified  with  Free  Soilers. 

Two  months  later  the  Kansas -Nebraska  Bill  came 
back   to  the  Senate  for  its  concurrence  with  House 


172  CHAELES  SUMNEK 

amendments.  Here  its  consideration  was  delayed 
one  day  by  an  objection  interposed  by  Sumner,  who 
never  hesitated  to  filibuster  in  a  cause  which  he 
thought  righteous.  The  bill  was  now  opposed  by 
the  same  four  senators  who  had  at  first  protested 
against  it,  with  one  exception  :  Everett,  apparently 
out  of  distaste  for  prolonged  controversy  over  sla 
very,  had  resigned  the  office  which  he  had  entered 
upon  with  enthusiasm  but  one  year  before.  In  his 
absence,  Sumner  took  occasion,  at  the  beginning  of 
his  speech,  to  present  several  belated  petitions  from 
New  England  clergymen,  which  had  been  intended 
for  the  earlier  memorial.  In  contrast  with  Everett's 
apologetic  presentation,  Sumner  announced  that  he 
did  this  service  "  with  pleasure  and  pride,"  and  he 
boldly  vindicated  the  reverend  petitioners'  language 
and  their  action,  declaring,  "There  are  men  in 
this  Senate  justly  eminent  for  eloquence,  learn 
ing,  and  ability  ;  but  there  is  no  man  here  compe 
tent,  except  in  his  own  conceit,  to  sit  in  judgment 
on  the  clergy  of  New  England."  In  eloquent  and 
zealous  words,  he  showed  how  throughout  New  Eng 
land' s  history,  the  clergy  had  been  associated  not 
only  with  the  piety  and  learning  but  with  the  liber 
ties  of  the  country. 

Perhaps  the  most  impressive  part  of  the  speech 
was  the  passage  which  forecast  the  effects  of  this  leg 
islation  :  "In  passing  such  a  bill  as  is  now  threat 
ened,  you  scatter,  from  this  dark  midnight  hour,  no 
seeds  of  harmony  and  good -will,  but  broadcast 
through  the  land  dragons'  teeth,  which  haply  may 


KE  VOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     173 

not  spring  up  in  direful  crops  of  armed  men,  yet  I 
am  assured,  sir,  will  fructify  in  civil  strife  and 
feud."  Yet  "  from  the  sting  of  this  hour  I  find  as 
surance  of  that  triumph  by  which  freedom  will  be 
restored  to  her  immortal  birthright  in  the  republic. 
.  .  .  Am  I  not  right,  then,  in  calling  this  bill 
the  best  on  which  Congress  ever  acted  ?  Sorrow 
fully  I  bend  before  the  wrong  you  commit,— joyfully 
I  welcome  the  promise  of  the  future." l 

The  very  day  when  the  Kansas- Nebraska  Bill  was 
passed  in  spite  of  Sunmer's  protest,  was  the  day 
when  the  attempt  was  made  by  a  crowd  led  by 
Thomas  Wentworth  Higgiuson  to  free  the  negro, 
Anthony  Burns,  from  the  Boston  Court- House, 
where  he  was  being  held  for  a  hearing  before  a 
United  States  commissioner, — an  attempt  which 
failed  of  its  object,  but  resulted  in  the  death  of  one 
of  the  guards  from  a  pistol-shot.  The  excitement 
caused  by  the  affair  was  prodigious,  and  some  South 
ern  leaders  tried  to  hold  Simmer's  words  about 
"  scattering  dragons'  teeth"  responsible  for  this 
mob  violence,  reckless  alike  of  their  context  in 
Simmer's  speech  and  of  the  fact  that  his  utterances 
were  not  known  in  Boston  until  the  day  after  the 
attempted  rescue  of  Burns.  The  bitterness  of  feel 
ing  was  seen  in  angry  articles  in  Washington  pro- 
slavery  papers,  which  were  obviously  intended  to 
incite  mob  violence  against  Sumner^  His  friends- 

^Ir.  Rhodes,  Vol.  I.  p.  490,  says :  "Judged  by  the  succeed 
ing  events,  the  most  remarkable  expressions  came  from  Sumuer, 
for  he  had  an  insight  into  the  future." 


174  CHARLES  SUMNEK 

warned  him  that  his  life  was  in  danger,  but  in  the 
midst  of  threats  he  was  ever  a  fatalist,  and  he  con 
tinued  to  walk  unarmed  about  the  capital. 

One  of  the  most  striking  evidences  of  the  change 
which  public  sentiment  was  undergoing  under  the 
combined  influence  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  debates 
and  the  Burns  case  was  a  petition  foi  the  repeal  of 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  which  had  been  placed  in 
the  Boston  Merchants'  Exchange  and  had  speedily 
been  signed  by  nearly  3,000  men,  mostly  from  the 
very  class  who  had  been  zealous  advocates  of  com 
promise.  Among  the  signers  was  even  the  ship 
captain  who  on  two  previous  occasions  had  gained 
notoriety  by  ready  assistance  in  the  capture  and  re 
turn  of  fugitive  slaves.  The  presentation  of  this 
petition  in  the  Senate  gave  rise  to  serious  debate, 
in  the  course  of  which  a  senator  from  Tennessee  de 
nounced  "such  miserable  miscreants  as  Parker, 
Phillips,  and  such  kindred  spirits,"  spoke  of  the 
pending  petition  as  "teeming  with  treason  and 
reeking  with  the  blood  of  an  innocent  victim,"  and 
declared  that  the  South  would  certainly  dissolve 
the  Union,  if  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  were  repealed. 
Sumner  repelled  this  threat  of  disunion,  and  boldly 
defended  Massachusetts  against  the  charge  of 
treason,  instancing  her  opposition  to  the  Stamp  Act 
as  a  precedent  for  her  present  resistance  in  the 
cause  of  human  rights. 

Up  to  the  time  of  the  Kansas- Nebraska  debates 
Sumner  had  had  no  serious  breaks  with  any  of  his 
colleagues  ;  their  angry  and  disdainful  epithets  on 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     175 

the  occasion  of  his  first  anti-slavery  speech  he  had 
passed  over  in  silence.  Even  as  late  as  January  14, 
1853,  he  had  declared:  "On  the  floor  of  the 
Senate  I  sit  between  Mr.  Butler  of  South  Carolina, 
the  early  suggester  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill,  and 
Mr.  Mason  of  Virginia,  its  final  author,  with  both 
of  whom  I  have  constant  and  cordial  intercourse.1' 
But  a  change  was  now  at  hand.  At  the  end  of 
Sumuer's  speech  upon  this  Boston  petition,  Butler 
poured  contempt  upon  his  "  vapid  rhetoric,"  and 
then  faced  him  with  the  question,  whether  Massa 
chusetts  would  execute  the  Constitution  and  send 
back  fugitive  slaves  even  after  a  jury  trial.  Su in 
ner  replied  :  u  Does  the  honorable  senator  ask  me 
if  I  would  personally  join  in  sending  a  fellow  man 
into  bondage?  Is  thy  servant  a  dog  that  he  should 
do  this  thing ! ' '  Butler,  i  n  great  excitement, 
shouted  :  "  Then  you  would  not  obey  the  Constitu 
tion.  .  .  .  You  stand  in  niy  presence  as  a  co 
equal  senator,  and  tell  me  that  it  is  a  dog's  office  to 
execute  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States!" 
"I  recognize  no  such  obligation,"  said  Sumner, 
meaning,  as  Fesseudeu  declared  every  one  on  the 
Whig  side  of  the  chamber  understood,  merely  that 
he  ' '  did  not  consider  that  the  Constitution  imposed 
any  such  obligation  upon  him."  But  he  was  imme 
diately  set  upon  by  Southern  senators  who  charged 
him  with  repudiating  his  oath  of  office  and  with  de 
claring  his  intention  to  disobey  the  Constitution. 
u  In  a  moral  point  of  view,"  said  Pettit  of  Indiana, 
* '  the  senator  from  Massachusetts  could  not,  in  view 


176  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

of  his  declaration  that  day,  find  any  one  beneath 
himself,"  and  he  declared  that  such  utterance  justi 
fied  expulsion.  Others  expressed  the  same  opinion, 
and  there  is  evidence  that  within  a  few  days  the 
Senate  was  canvassed,  bat  that  it  was  found  that 
the  requisite  vote  of  two-thirds  could  not  be 
secured. 

When  the  debate  was  resumed  a  day  or  two  later, 
the  abuse  of  Sumner  took  an  even  more  frenzied 
and  vulgar  tone.  He  was  denounced  as  "a  mis 
creant,"  "a  sneaking,  sinuous,  snake-like  pol 
troon,"  and  a  flood  of  less  decent  epithets  was  let 
loose  upon  him.  At  last  he  was  stung  to  reply. 
Although  at  this  stage  of  his  career  Sumner  was 
slow  to  anger,  few  men  ever  succeeded  in  provok 
ing  him  who  did  not  find  cause  to  regret  it.  He 
proudly  refused  to  bandy  epithets  or  to  deign  any 
reply  to  the  more  scurrilous  of  his  assailants.  To 
Butler's  protest  against  his  use  of  the  term  "  slave- 
hunter,"  he  rejoined:  "Sir,  I  choose  to  call 
things  by  their  right  names.  .  .  .  And  when  a 
person  degrades  himself  to  the  work  of  chasing  a 
fellow  man  who  under  the  inspiration  of  freedom 
and  the  guidance  of  the  North  Star  has  sought  a 
freeman's  home,  far  away  from  coffle  or  chain,  that 
person,  whosoever  he  may  be,  I  call  i  slave- 
hunter.  >"  Eeproaches  against  Massachusetts  and 
against  himself  as  to  constitutional  obligations  he 
resented  from  the  lips  of  a  senator  who  represented 
a  state  which  had  expelled  from  her  borders  the 
venerable  Samuel  Hoar,  which  had  tampered  with 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     177 

the  United  States  mails,  which  was  "seamed  all 
over  with  the  scars  of  nullification,"  and  "threat 
ened  nullification  as  often  as  babies  cry."  Butler 
had  asserted  that  "the  independence  of  America 
was  won  by  the  arms  and  treasure  of  slaveholding 
communities."  Sunnier  now  accepted  the  chal 
lenge,  and  proved  by  indisputable  evidence  how 
comparatively  insignificant  had  been  the  coopera 
tion  of  South  Carolina  and  of  her  sister  slavehold- 
iug  colonies  in  that  movement,  and  that  the  excuse 
which  they  themselves  had  given  at  the  time  was 
"their  weakness  and  fears  growing  out  of  their 
slave  population."1  Turning  to  "the  veteran 
senator  from  Virginia"  (Mason),  who,  "with  an 
imperious  look,  and  in  the  style  of  Sir  Forcible 
Feeble,  undertakes  to  call  in  question  my  statement 
that  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  denies  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus,"  Surnner  continued:  "  Sitting  near 
him,  ...  I  have  come  to  know  something  of 
his  conversation,  something  of  his  manners,  some 
thing  of  his  attainments,  something  of  his  abilities, 
something  of  his  character, — ay,  sir,  and  something 
of  his  associations.  ...  As  senator  of  Massa 
chusetts  and  as  man,  I  place  myself  at  every  point 
in  unhesitating  comparison  with  that  honorable 
assailant.  And  to  his  peremptory  assertion  that 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  does  not  deny  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus  I  oppose  my  assertion,  peremptory  as 
his  own,  that  it  does  ;  and  there  I  leave  the  issue." 
As  to  the  charge  that  he  had  repudiated  his  oath, 
fierce,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  384. 


178  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

8 u  inner  declared  that  lie  had  sworn  to  support  the 
Constitution  as  he  understood  it,  and  appealed  to 
well-known  words  of  Jackson  and  of  Buchanan  as 
serting  this  interpretation  of  the  oath  of  a  Federal 
official.  "Does  he  [Sunnier]  recognize  the  obliga 
tion  to  return  a  fugitive  slave?"  asked  Toucey  of 
Connecticut.  "  To  that  I  answer  distinctly,  no!" 
was  Sunnier' s  reply,  and  with  that  the  debate 
closed. 

Chase  did  not  overrate  the  significance  of  Sum- 
uer's  part  in  this  debate  when  he  said  :  "You  have 
struck  slavery  the  strongest  blow  it  ever  received  ; 
vou  have  made  it  reel  to  the  centre."  He  had  vin- 
v:  dicated  the  right  of  free  speech  and  freedom  of 
petition  in  the  Senate  as  John  Quincy  Adams  had 
done  in  the  House  :  hereafter  anti-slavery  petitions 
were  duly  presented  and  referred,  instead  of  being 
suppressed.  To  the  aggressive  arrogance  of  the 
South  he  had  shown  an  opposition  as  unyielding  as 
adamant.  At  last  there  had  appeared  a  champion 
for  freedom,  who  knew  no  fear,  whom  angry  looks 
or  indecent  epithets  could  not  swerve  a  hair's 
breadth  from  the  course  he  had  laid  down,  and  who 
was  a  master  of  debate,  skilled  in  the  use  of  weapons 
whose  keenness  and  temper  his  angry  assailants 
could  not  match.  It  is  no  wonder  that  they  sought 
the  expulsion  of  so  formidable  an  antagonist,  and 
that  by  common  consent  most  of  the  Southern 
senators  from  this  time  honored  him  by  avoiding 
all  personal  association  with  him  as  beneath  the 
notice  of  gentlemen  of  their  school. 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     179 

But  from  all  parts  of  the  North  caine  words  of 
strongest  commendation  of  Simmer's  course  in  this 
debate.  His  promptness  and  resourcefulness,  his 
vindication  of  Massachusetts  against  unjust  attack, 
his  dignity  and  courage,  his  manly  self-respect  in 
maintaining  his  own  opinion  in  the  face  of  Mason's 
arrogant  dictum, — all  these  made  friends  and  ad 
mirers  in  quarters  where  he  had  been  held  in  slight 
regard.  Even  the  time-serving  press  of  Boston  had 
to  yield  to  the  demand  for  the  triumphant  senator's 
speeches,  which  hitherto  they  had  excluded  or 
published  only  in  garbled  form. 

The  point  dealt  with  least  positively  in  these  de 
bates  was  the  precise  attitude  of  the  North  toward 
the  enforcement  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act.  More 
than  once  Sumuer  himself  evaded  the  question  or 
declined  to  define  that  attitude  in  advance.  For 
himself,  he  never  would  admit  that  the  phrase 
" persons  held  to  service"  was  intended  by  its 
authors  to  apply  to  fugitive  slaves,  and  hence  he 
denied  outright  the  constitutionality  of  the  Act. 
He  opposed  unsuccessful ly  a  proposal  for  a  pension 
for  the  widow  of  the  victim  in  the  Burns  rescue,  on 
the  ground  that  the  service  rendered  by  the  victim 
was  not  of  the  nature  for  which  pensions  were 
granted  and  further  that  the  Act  under  which  the 
service  was  rendered  was  unconstitutional,  and  its 
enforcement  repugnant  to  the  moral  sense  of  the 
states  in  which  it  was  attempted.  Failing  in  this 
effort,  he  then  sought  to  introduce  a  bill  for  the  re 
peal  of  the  Act,  but  this  was  defeated  by  a  majority 


180  CHARLES  SUMNER 

of  twenty-five.  It  was  significant,  however,  that 
instead  of  four  votes,  as  two  years  before,  his  mo 
tion  now  mustered  ten  in  its  favor,  and  that  Seward, 
who  before  had  politically  refrained  from  voting, 
now  came  out  in  favor  of  repeal,  while  Fish,  who 
had  then  supported  the  law,  now  advanced  to  the 
position  of  not  voting  upon  the  question. 

Never  had  Surnner  commanded  so  cordial  a  wel 
come  and  so  sympathetic  a  hearing  as  when,  a  few 
weeks  after  the  close  of  the  session,  he  appeared  be 
fore  the  state  convention  in  \Vorcester.  His  speech 
kindled  the  most  intense  enthusiasm.  He  sought 
to  vindicate  the  necessity  of  a  third  party  in  Mas 
sachusetts,  and  to  destroy  there  the  operation  of  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Act,  arguing  that  citizens  were  not 
constrained  to  its  support.  He  certainly  was  tread 
ing  upon  dangerous  ground  when  although  admit 
ting  that  judgments  were  binding  upon  inferior 
tribunals  and  upon  executive  officers,  he  neverthe 
less  denied  to  judicial  tribunals  the  power  to  dictate 
to  Congress  an  interpretation  of  the  Constitution  or 
to  bind  the  individual  conscience.  But  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law  as  Quincy  declared,  had  become  "an  in 
supportable  burden." 

Almost  immediately  after  the  passage  of  the 
/Kansas- Nebraska  Bill,  the  project  was  agitated  in 
Massachusetts  of  forming  a  new  party  under  the 
name  "Republican,"  in  which  those  opposed  to  the 
extension  of  slavery,  whatever  their  previous  party 
affiliations,  might  cooperate  for  the  attainment  of 
that  one  object.  In  the  early  summer  a  committee 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     181 

of  correspondence,  of  which  Samuel  Hoar  and  Ealph 
Waldo  Emerson  were  members,  was  formed  in  Con 
cord,  and  called  a  meeting  of  representative  political 
leaders  in  Boston.  Hardly  any  but  Free  Soilers 
responded  to  the  suminous,  for  the  project  had  been 
antagonized  by  the  Whig  press,  by  prominent  Whig 
leaders,  as  individuals,  and  by  an  address  in  which 
the  Whig  state  committee  declined  to  call  a  fusion 
convention,  asserting  that  their  party  was  still 
( '  the  vanguard  of  the  great  army  of  constitutional 
liberty." 

This  resistance  of  the  Whigs  of  influence  to  the 
formation  of  a  new  party  based  on  the  one  vital 
issue  had  a  curious  result.  In  New  York  City 
there  had  recently  sprung  up  a  secret  order  which 
represented  a  recrudescence  of  uativism.  Its  au 
thoritative  name  is  said  to  have  been  "  The  Supreme 
Order  of  the  Star-Spangled  Banner."  It  gradually 
obtained  a  foothold  in  other  states,  and  aspired  to 
aftect  state  and  national  politics.  Conditions  were 
ripe  for  its  growth  in  Massachusetts.  No  other 
state  with  the  exception  of  New  York  had  as  yet 
been  so  embarrassed  and  alarmed  by  the  influx  of 
needy  immigrants,  who  were  contributing  far  more 
than  their  quota  to  the  asylums,  jails  and  alms- 
houses,  and  were  causing  an  upheaval  in  industrial 
relations.  The  growth  of  the  Eoman  Catholic 
Church,  too,  was  viewed  with  unreasoning  though 
not  unnatural  alarm.  The  result  was  that  in  the 
distracted  political  situation  whicli  the  Whigs  now 
forced  upon  the  people  of  Massachusetts,  wheji  the 


182  CHARLES  SUMNER 

loyalty  of  tens  of  thousands  of  voters  to  the  parties 
of  their  fathers  was  relaxed  because  those  parties 
refused  to  face  the  dominaut  issue,  this  secret  order 
made  a  strong  appeal,  particularly  to  young  labor 
ing  men,  throughout  the  commonwealth ;  and,  as 
it  was  felt  to  be  gaining  strength,  not  a  few  office 
holders  and  politicians  sought  entrance  to  its  lodges. 
Adams,  Suuiuer,  Palfrey  and  Andrew,  and  most  of 
the  other  strong  Free  Soil  leaders  resisted  this  temp 
tation,  but  Wilson  became  a  member  of  the  order, 
although  he  had  already  accepted  the  nomination 
of  the  Eepublicans  for  governor.  Never  was  a 
greater  surprise  in  the  history  of  politics  than  on 
the  day  when  the  results  of  the  state  election  were 
declared  :  this  secret  order,  the  mushroom  growth 
of  a  night,  was  found  to  have  swept  the  state,  elect 
ing  all  the  state  officers,  the  full  delegation  in  Con 
gress,  and  practically  the  entire  membership  of  both 
houses  of  the  state  legislature.  Wilson's  election  to 
the  United  States  Senate,  as  the  successor  of  Everett, 
was  thus  clearly  presaged,  and  this  was  speedily 
carried  into  effect. 

The  methods  and  some  of  the  objects  of  the  Know- 
Xothings  were  deemed  unworthy  by  most  Massa 
chusetts  men  of  light  and  leading, — by  none  more 
than  by  Sumner  ;  but  their  momentary  success  had 
the  good  effect  of  furnishing  a  new  gathering-point 
in  the  chaos  of  Massachusetts  politics.  It  showed 
how  anaemic  the  Whig  party  had  become,  and  the 
result  was  to  give  opportunity  for  the  rapid  and 
healthy  growth  of  the  Republican  party,  enlisting 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     183 

in  its  ranks  not  only  anti-slavery  Whigs  and  inde 
pendent  Democrats,  but  also  the  speedily  disinte 
grating  troops  of  Know-Nothings. 

The  first  session  of  the  Thirty-third  Congress  had 
been  so  given  over  to  the  discussion  of  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  Bill  that  in  the  short  session  there  was  a 
general  disposition  to  let  slavery  topics  alone.  To 
ward  its  end,  a  wide-ranging  debate  was  precipi 
tated  by  a  bill  introduced  by  Toucey  of  Connecticut, 
providing  for  the  transfer  to  federal  courts  of  all 
suits  "  pending  in  state  courts  against  federal  officers 
and  other  persons  for  acts  done  under  any  law  or 
color  of  any  law  of  the  United  States."  Its  obvious 
though  unacknowledged  purpose  was  to  bring  before 
more  friendly  courts  suits  begun  in  state  tribunals 
for  damages  against  persons  aiding  in  the  execu 
tion  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act.  Chase  forced  into 
prominence  this  effect  and  probable  object  of  the 
proposed  bill,  and  the  debate  then  called  up  the 
leaders  on  both  sides  of  the  slavery  issue.  Wilson, 
newly  elected  by  Know-Nothing  votes,  on  this  oc 
casion  discussed  slavery  for  the  first  time  in  the 
Senate.  Butler  again  seized  the  opportunity  to  nag 
Suinuer  with  questions  as  to  his  fidelity  to  his  sena 
tor's  oath,  and,  not  succeeding  in  provoking  a  reply, 
declared  that  he  would  "not  take  advantage  of  the 
infirmity  of  a  man  who  did  not  know  half  his  time 
what  he  was  about," — a  remark  the  humor  of  which 
appealed  to  every  one  but  himself,  for,  while  Sum- 
ner  was  proverbially  temperate,  Butler  was  often 
under  the  influence  of  liquor,  and  seemed  to  be  un- 


184  CHAELES  SUMNER 

duly  exhilarated  at  that  very  moment.  Suniner  did 
not  get  the  floor  till  about  midnight ;  he  then  at 
tacked  the  bill  as  "an  effort  to  bolster  up  the  Fugi 
tive  Slave  Act," — a  measure  which  was  u  conceived 
in  defiance  of  the  Constitution ' '  and  was  i  i  a  bare 
faced  subversion  of  every  principle  of  humanity  and 
justice."  His  motion  for  its  repeal  now  secured 
nine  votes. 

During  this  session  Sumner  put  himself  to  no 
little  trouble,  acting  as  the  representative  of  John 
A.  Andrew,  to  effect  the  purchase  of  the  family  of 
one  of  Andrew's  colored  friends.  The  children 
were  nearly  white,  and  their  appearance  and  pic 
tures  made  in  the  North  a  great  impression  of  the 
enormities  of  the  slave  system. 

Soon  after  his  return  to  Boston  at  the  close 
of  the  session,  Sumner  delivered  an  address  in 
Tremont  Temple  on  "  The  necessity,  practicability, 
and  dignity  of  the  anti-slavery  enterprise,  with 
glances  at  the  special  duties  of  the  North."  It 
was  one  of  the  most  comprehensive  and  per 
suasive  presentations  of  the  anti -slavery  cause 
of  the  whole  period  of  the  controversy.  There 
was  a  great  demand  for  it  in  other  cities.  For 
the  first  time,  Sumner  was  called  to  New  York  City, 
and  delivered  this  address  twice  there  and  again 
in  Brooklyn,  being  received  everywhere  with  much 
enthusiasm. 

It  was  during  the  mouths  of  this  summer  that 
Suniner  gratified  a  long-felt  wish  by  making  his 
first  trip  to  the  West,  On  his  journey  he  had 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     185 

pleasant  visits  with  Horace  Maim,  who  had  become 
president  of  Antioch  College,  and  with  Chase,  who 
was  entering  upon  his  campaign  for  the  governor 
ship  of  Ohio.  He  went  to  the  home  and  grave  of 
Henry  Clay  at  Lexington,  Ky.,  and  in  this  vicinity 
observed  with  keen  interest  the  life  of  slaves  on  a 
large  plantation.  He  seemed  both  surprised  at  find- 
ing  them  so  well -conditioned  and  contented,  and 
saddened  at  the  thought  of  their  being  condemned 
to  a  life  of  servitude.  From  St.  Louis  he  traveled 
by  steamboat  to  St.  Paul. 

Upon  his  return  to  Boston  in  September  from  this 
journey  on  which  he  had  "  traversed  eleven  free 
states  and  three  slave  states,'7  he  found  Massachu 
setts  politics  still  in  turmoil.  The  anti-slavery  fac 
tion  of  the  Know-Nothing  party  was  ready  to  join 
with  other  ant i- slavery  men,  but  the  other  faction 
still  persisted  in  emphasizing  nativism  as  the  princi 
pal  issue.  The  great  influence  of  the  Springfield 
Republican  and  of  its  eminent  editor,  Samuel  Bowles, 
was  cast  in  favor  of  the  Republican  party,  and, 
though  heretofore  riot  friendly  to  Sumner,  he  now 
urged  him  to  take  the  lead  in  the  campaign  as  "a 
captain  whose  moral  power  has  not  been  weakened 
by  participation  in  the  preliminaries  of  the  cam 
paign,  who  has  not  suffered  himself  to  be  debauched 
by  the  local  politics  of  the  last  twelve  mouths.'7 
Sumner  heeded  the  call,  and  spoke  to  great  audi 
ences  in  the  principal  cities  of  the  state,  empha 
sizing  in  particular  the  necessity,  under  existing 
conditions,  of  a  party  based  upon  the  principle  of 


186  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

resistance  to  the  extension  of  slavery.  But  he  also 
gave  prominence  to  a  criticism  of  the  principles  and 
methods  of  the  Know-Nothing  organization,  paying 
an  eloquent  tribute  to  the  services  rendered  to  the 
United  States  by  men  of  foreign  birth,  of  both  high 
and  low  walks  in  life,  and  showing  how  religious  pro 
scription  was  out  of  harmony  with  the  best  Ameri 
can  traditions.  "A  party  which,  beginning  in 
secret,  interferes  with  religious  belief,  and  founds  a 
discrimination  on  the  accident  of  birth,  is  not  the 
party  for  us." 

Such  language  was  reckless  of  political  expe 
diency,  for  Sumner's  term  in  the  Senate  was  ap 
proaching  its  end,  and  the  Know-Nothing  body  in 
Massachusetts  was  still  a  power  to  be  reckoned 
with.  But  in  his  whole  career  Sumner  never 
swerved  from  what  he  believed  to  be  the  line  of 
truth  and  duty  to  further  his  own  fortune  or  the 
success  of  a  political  party.  The  Know-Nothing 
governor  was  reflected,  for  the  Boston  Whigs  still 
refused  to  recognize  that  their  party  was  in  its  last 
throes.  The  Know-Nothings  again  secured  a  major 
ity  in  the  legislature,  and,  doubtless  in  resentment 
at  Sumner's  unpalatable  words  in  the  campaign,  it 
was  urged  that  this  newly  elected  body  should 
take  into  its  own  hands  the  choice  of  Sumuer's 
successor,  which  would  naturally  devolve  upon 
the  legislators  to  be  chosen  a  year  later.  But 
such  a  step  would  have  been  of  doubtful  con 
stitutionality  and  flagrantly  out  of  harmony  with 
precedent  and  current  practice,  so  that  the  proj- 


REVOLUTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS     187 

ect  was  soon  dropped.  Who  could  Ibivsee  the 
dark  event  which  within  that  twelvemonth  was  to 
bind  the  heart  of  Massachusetts  as  of  one  man  to 
Charles  Sumner  ! 


CHAPTER  X 

"  THE  CRIME  AGAINST  KANSAS,"  AND  THE  BEOOKS 
ASSAULT 

AT  the  opening  of  the  new  Congress,  nearly  one- 
fourth  of  the  members  were  Eepublicans.  They 
could  no  longer  be  shut  out  of  committees  on  the 
ground  that  they  were  not  members  of  any  healthy 
political  party,  but  their  assignments  were  to  posi 
tions  of  little  responsibility.  Greeley  wrote  in  the 
Tribune  of  December  14,  1 855  :  ' l  Mr.  Sumner — 
whose  reputation  as  a  scholar,  orator  and  statesman 
is  not  confined  to  this  hemisphere — dangles  at  the 
tail  of  two  unimportant  committees.1  Such  is  sla 
very's  confession  that  she  feels  the  point  of  his 
spear." 

During  the  first  two  months  of  the  session,  the 
subject  of  all-engrossing  interest  was  the  contest 
over  the  speakership.  Though  the  majority  of  mem 
bers  of  the  House  were  now  opposed  to  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  Bill  and  to  the  administration  which  had 
fathered  it,  the  various  Eepublican  and  Know- 
Nothing  elements  were  so  discordant  that  not  until 
the  133d  ballot  was  the  contest  decided  by  the  elec 
tion  of  N.  P.  Banks,  a  Massachusetts  Eepublican, 
whose  political  career  had  been  aided  by  his  tem 
porary  alliance  with  the  nativists. 

1  Pensions  and  Enrolled  Bills. 


"THE  CRIME  AGAINST  KANSAS"       189 

Meantime  Kansas  bad  become  the  scene  of  a  yet 
sterner  struggle.  Missouriaus  had  hailed  with  ac 
claim  the  repeal  of  the  prohibition  of  1820  in  the 
belief  that  the  new  territory  contiguous  to  their  own 
state  would  as  a  matter  of  course  be  peopled  by 
slaveholders.  But  it  soon  became  apparent  that 
this  anticipation  was  likely  to  be  defeated  unless 
they  put  forth  strenuous  efforts,  for  bands  of  earnest 
settlers  were  coming  from  the  Northern  states,  de 
termined  to  turn  the  decision  of  "  squatter  sover 
eignty"  in  favor  of  freedom. 

The  principal  leader  of  the  Missourians  was  Atch- 
ison,  who  had  recently  presided  over  the  United 
States  Senate  ;  and  the  appeal  went  forth  to  the 
cotton  states  for  recruits  to  repel  the  colonists  from 
the  North  and  keep  the  territory  from  their  grasp. 
But  the  North  was  not  less  alert.  Even  before  the 
Kansas- Nebraska  Bill  had  become  a  law,  Eli  Thayer 
of  Worcester  was  devising  plans  for  assisted  emigra 
tion,  which  presently  took  shape  in  the  "  New  Eng 
land  Emigrant  Aid  Company,"  incorporated  under 
the  laws  of  Massachusetts,  and  enlisting  in  its  work 
some  of  the  ablest  and  bravest  men  in  New  England. 
The  arrival  of  its  first  party  of  colonists  in  Kansas 
in  the  early  spring  of  1855  aroused  the  Missourians 
to  fierce  resentment.  At  the  time  of  the  March 
election,  5,000  of  the  "  border  ruffians"  swept 
across  the  state  line,  terrorized  the  polling  officers 
into  receiving  their  ballots,  and  elected  a  legislature 
which  would  be  their  fitting  representatives. 

To  the  body  thus  fraudulently  chosen,  the  free- 


190  CHARLES  SUMNEK 

state  settlers  gave  no  recognition,  but  proceeded 
to  elect  a  delegate  to  Congress  and  delegates  to  a 
constitutional  convention,  who  met  at  Topeka  and 
drew  up  a  constitution.  This  was  approved  by  the 
free-state  voters,  who  forthwith  elected  a  legislature 
which  applied  to  Congress  for  admission  as  a  free 
state  under  the  Topeka  Constitution.  In  all  these 
proceedings  the  pro-slavery  settlers  and  their  allies 
had  taken  no  part.  But  they  eagerly  sought  occa 
sions  for  quarrel,  and  in  November  1,200  border 
ruffians  surrounded  Lawrence,  the  principal  free- 
state  town,  evidently  bent  on  destroying  it.  Find 
ing  the  townspeople  armed  with  Sharpens  rifles,  the 
marauders  withdrew,  but  they  had  not  disbanded 
when  Congress  assembled.  The  message  and  the 
later  proclamation  of  the  President  gave  full  recog 
nition  to  what  might  fittingly  be  called  the  "  Mis 
souri"  legislature,  and  federal  troops  were  placed  at 
the  service  of  Governor  Shannon. 

The  Senate  was  prompt  in  calling  for  documents 
relating  to  conditions  in  Kansas,  and  these  gave  rise 
to  hot  debate.1  So  violent  were  the  passions  aroused 
that,  with  sure  prescience,  Sumner  declared  to  a 
friend:  "This  session  will  not  pass  without  the 
Senate  chamber's  becoming  the  scene  of  some  un 
paralleled  outrage. '  >  Wilson  took  the  lead,  emphasi 
zing  the  part  which  the  Missouri  invaders  had  played 
and  the  favor  and  cooperation  extended  to  the  pro- 
slavery  faction  by  the  administration.  In  the 

1  Said  to  a  brother  of  Col.  T.  W.  Higginson.  Contemporaries, 
p.  283. 


"THE  CK1ME  AGAINST  KANSAS"       191 

House,  the  issue  was  joined  over  the  recognition  of 
the  delegate.  Finally  it  was  voted  to  send  a  com 
mission  of  investigation  to  the  territory.  After 
careful  study  of  the  situation,  the  majority  reported 
that  the  territorial  legislature  was  the  product  of 
fraud  and  violence,  and  hence  all  its  acts  were  void. 

In  the  Senate,  the  principal  debate  on  Kansas 
awaited  the  report  from  the  Committee  on  Territo 
ries.  It  proved  to  be  a  divided  report,  but  Douglas, 
for  the  majority,  following  the  lead  of  the  President, 
laid  the  blame  of  all  the  disorders  upon  the  aggres 
sions  of  the  Emigrant  Aid  Company.  He  presented 
a  bill  providing  for  the  early  organization  of  a  stale 
government  by  a  procedure  which  would  distinctly 
confirm  the  legality  of  the  "  Missouri  "  legislature. 
Sunnier  straightway  denounced  this  majority  report 
for  smothering  the  true  issue,  and  declared  that 
both  the  motive  and  acts  of  the  Emigrant  Aid  Com 
pany  were  right  and  lawful.  He  closed  thus  :  "  A 
bad  cause  is  naturally  stated  on  untenable  ground. 
You  cannot  show  the  misconduct  [of  the  company]. 
Any  such  allegation  will  fail ;  and  you  now  begin 
your  game  with  loaded  dice."  These  words  greatly 
angered  Douglas,  who  upbraided  him  for  " justify 
ing  treason  and  rebellion,"  and  threatened  him  with 
the  penalties  of  such  heinous  conduct.  Two  days 
later  he  returned  to  an  attack  upon  Sumner,  giving 
vent  to  offensive  epithets  and  attributing  to  him 
"baseness"  and  " base  purposes." 

This  discussion  of  Kansas  affairs  was  but  a  pre 
liminary  skirmish  to  the  real  fight  which  began  in 


192  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  latter  part  of  March,  when  there  came  before 
the  Senate  the  two  reports  and  also  two  separate 
bills,  for  Seward  had  introduced  one  providing  for 
the  admission  of  Kansas  upon  the  Topeka  Con 
stitution.  Douglas  took  the  lead  with  a  speech  full 
of  venom  and  scurrility.  All  his  opponents  he 
stigmatized  as  u  black  Republicans"  and  he  de 
nounced  his  own  colleague  from  Illinois  as  a  traitor, 
worthy  of  death.  The  Emigrant  Aid  Company 
drew  from  him  and  his  followers  the  bitterest  of 
abuse.  Northern  leaders  were  referred  to  in  terms 
of  contempt  and  social  ostracism  was  urged  against 
them.  Wilson  resented  these  insults  and  made 
some  stinging  rejoinders.  Seward  ignored  such 
vulgar  attacks ;  although  his  speech  arraigned  the 
President  as  mainly  responsible  for  the  disorders  in 
Kansas,  it  did  not  grapple  with  the  main  issue. 
Sumner  secured  the  floor  for  the  19th  of  May  (1856). 
Two  days  before  he  was  to  speak,  he  wrote  to  Theo 
dore  Parker  :  "  Alas  !  the  tyranny  over  us  is  com 
plete.  Will  the  people  submit  f  When  you  read 
this,  I  shall  be  saying  to  the  Senate,  'They  will 
not ! J  Would  that  I  had  your  strength  !  But  I 
shall  pronounce  the  most  thorough  philippic  ever 
uttered  in  a  legislative  body." 

Meantime,  in  far-away  Kansas  veritable  civil  war 
had  begun.  Recruits  had  been  mustered  even  from 
Alabama  and  South  Carolina.  At  the  call  of  a 
United  States  marshal,  ostensibly  to  aid  in  execu 
ting  process  on  a  free-state  man,  these,  together  with 
hundreds  of  Missourians,  had  gathered,  and,  at  the 


"THE  CEIME  AGAINST  KANSAS"      193 

moment  when  Sunnier  began  his  speech,  they  had 
for  several  days  been  marauding  in  the  vicinity  of 
Lawrence.  Their  lines  kept  drawing  closer.  On 
the  morning  of  the  day  after  Sumuer  had  finished 
depicting  "the  crime  against  Kansas,"  this  armed 
mob  was  in  position  upon  the  bluffs  which  com 
manded  the  town  and  before  the  sun  had  set,  al 
though  the  arrest  had  been  made  without  resistance, 
the  ruffians  had  stormed  the  place,  smashed  printing- 
presses,  fired  the  hotel  of  the  Emigrant  Aid  Com 
pany,  and  plundered  and  burned  the  townspeople's 
homes. 

When  Suniner  began  his  speech,  despite  the  in 
tensity  of  the  heat,  the  Senate  galleries  and  adjoin 
ing  rooms  were  thronged.  There  was  a  tenseness 
of  anticipation  in  the  air.  It  was  felt  that  hitherto 
the  Northern  speakers  had  shown  too  much  meek 
ness.  Sumner  had  been  the  man  most  viciously 
assailed,  and  it  was  known  that  he  would  now  reply 
with  utter  fearlessness  and  would  speak  the  naked 
truth  as  he  saw  it.  And  his  text  was  at  hand, 
for  every  one  in  Washington  believed  that  blood 
would  soon  be  shed  in  Kansas,  and  before  night  it 
was  known  that  Lawrence  lay  at  the  mercy  of  the 
mob. 

In  opening  his  speech  Sumner  presented  a  glow 
ing  picture  of  the  beauties  of  the  new  aspirant  for 
statehood.  He  then  declared  that  "the  crime 
against  Kansas"— the  phrase  in  which  he  epito 
mized  his  own  speech — was  aggravated  by  the 
motive,  which  was  "  the  rape  of  a  virgin  territory, 


194  CHARLES  SUMNER 

compelling  it  to  the  hateful  embrace  of  slavery, 
.  .  .  traceable  to  a  depraved  desire  for  a  new 
slave  state,  hideous  offspring  of  such  a  crime,  in 
the  hope  of  adding  to  the  power  of  slavery  in  the 
national  government,  .  .  .  force  being  openly 
employed  in  compelling  Kansas  to  this  pollution." 
He  denounced  the  Kansas- Nebraska  Bill  as  "in 
every  respect  a  swindle,  .  .  .  the  only  word 
which  could  adequately  express  the  mingled  mean 
ness  and  wickedness  of  the  cheat. "  He  enumerated 
the  deeds  of  violence  which  had  been  committed  in 
Kansas  j  he  laid  stress  upon  the  ways  in  which  the 
President  and  his  administration  had  abetted  them, 
characterizing  as  an  "apology  imbecile"  Pierce' s 
disclaimer  of  power  to  act,  and  spoke  of  the  other 
excuses  for  the  crime  as  * '  the  apology  tyrannical,  the 
apology  absurd,  and  the  apology  infamous."  .  .  . 
1 '  Tyranny,  imbecility,  absurdity  and  infamy  all 
unite,  like  the  weird  sisters,  to  dance  about  this 
crime."  He  told  of  Atchison's  having,  "like 
Cataline,  stalked  into  this  chamber,  reeking  with 
conspiracy,"  where  he  had  found  "a  senator 
[Butler]  who  had  not  hesitated  to  appear  as  his 
open  compurgator."  He  defended  the  Emigrant 
Aid  Company  with  great  vigor,  and  closed  his  re 
marks  of  the  first  day  with  bold  words  of  praise  for 
Massachusetts,  the  leader  in  the  war  of  the  Revolu 
tion,  "to  which  she  contributed  troops  in  larger 
numbers  than  any  other  state,  and  larger  than  all 
the  slave  states  together,"  just  as  in  the  present 
struggle  "she  contributes  .  .  .  more  of  that 


"THE  CRIME  AGAINST  KANSAS"       195 

divine  spark  by  which  opinions  are  quickened 
into  life  than  is  contributed  by  any  other  state, 
or  by  all  the  slave  states  together,  while  her 
annual  productive  industry  exceeds  in  value  three 
times  the  whole  vaunted  cotton  crop  of  the  whole 
South." 

In  the  course  of  his  remarks  he  turned  his  atten 
tion  to  the  senators  u  who  had  raised  themselves  to 
eminence  on  this  floor  in  the  championship  of 
human  wrongs :  I  mean  the  senator  from  South 
Carolina  [Butler]  and  the  senator  from  Illinois 
[Douglas],  who,  though  unlike  as  Don  Quixote  and 
Sancho  Panza,  yet,  like  this  couple,  sally  forth  to 
gether  in  the  same  adventure."  "The  senator 
from  South  Carolina  has  read  many  books  of 
chivalry,  and  believes  himself  a  chivalrous  knight, 
with  sentiments  of  honor  and  courage.  Of  course 
he  has  chosen  a  mistress  to  whom  he  has  made  his 
vows,  and  who,  though  ugly  to  others,  is  always 
lovely  to  him  ;  though  polluted  in  the  sight  of  the 
world,  is  chaste  in  his  sight.  I  mean  the  harlot, 
Slavery.  For  her  his  tongue  is  always  profuse  in 
words.  ...  If  the  slave  states  cannot  en 
joy  ...  the  full  power  in  the  national  territo 
ries  to  compel  fellow  men  to  unpaid  toil,  to  separate 
husband  and  wife,  and  to  sell  lirtle  children  at  the 
auction  block, — then,  sir,  the  chivalric  senator  will 
conduct  the  state  of  South  Carolina  out  of  the 
Union  !  Heroic  knight !  Exalted  senator  !  a  sec 
ond  Moses  come  for  a  second  exodus  !  "  He  then 
vindicated  the  Republican  party  against  Butler's 


196  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

charge  of  sectionalism,  declaring:  "It  is  in  no 
just  sense  sectional,  but,  more  than  any  other 
party,  national ;  and  ...  it  now  goes  forth  to 
dislodge  from  the  high  places  that  tyrannical  sec 
tionalism  of  which  the  senator  from  South  Carolina 
is  one  of  the  maddest  zealots.'' 

Of  Douglas  he  said :  "As  the  senator  from  South 
Carolina  is  the  Don  Quixote,  so  the  senator  from. 
Illinois  is  the  squire  of  slavery,  its  very  Sancho 
Panza,  ready  to  do  its  humiliating  offices.  This 
senator  in  his  labored  address,  vindicating  his 
labored  report,  — piling  one  mass  of  elaborate  error 
upon  another  mass, — constrained  himself,  as  you 
will  remember,  to  unwonted  decencies  of  speech." 
Sumner  then  proceeded  to  declare  that  while  with 
his  boastful  swagger  he  might  convulse  the  country 
with  civil  feud,  Douglas  could  not  enforce  obedience 
to  the  tyrannical  usurpation  in  Kansas. 

While  Sumner  was  speaking,  the  pro-slavery 
senators  at  first  feigned  indifference,  and  kept  up  so 
much  conversation  and  laughter  among  themselves 
that  they  had  to  be  called  to  order.  At  the  end  of 
three  hours,  Sumner  stopped ;  he  concluded  his 
speech  in  two  hours  on  the  following  day.  He 
strongly  urged  that  Kansas  be  admitted  as  a  state 
upon  the  Topeka  Constitution.  He  denounced 
Butler,  a  judge  and  chairman  of  the  Judiciary 
Committee  of  the  Senate,  for  proposing  that  a  war 
rant  be  issued  for  Sharpens  rifles: — "to  compass 
the  wretched  purposes  of  a  wretched  cause,  he  thus 
purposes  to  trample  on  one  of  the  plainest  pro- 


"THE  CRIME  AGAINST  KANSAS"      197 

visions  of  constitutional  liberty."  Later,  referring 
to  Butler's  angry  outbreaks  at  the  mere  suggestion 
of  the  admission  of  Kansas  as  a  free  state,  Sunnier 
said:  "  With  incoherent  phrase  [he]  discharges 
the  loose  expectoration  of  his  speech  now  upon  her 
representative,  and  then  upon  her  people.  .  .  . 
There  was  no  possible  deviation  from  truth  which 
he  did  not  make,  with  so  much  passion,  I  gladly 
add,  as  to  save  him  from  the  suspicion  of  inten 
tional  aberration.  ...  He  shows  an  incapacity 
for  accuracy,  whether  in  stating  the  Constitution, 
or  in  stating  the  law,  whether  in  details  of  statistics 
or  diversions  of  scholarship.  He  cannot  ope  his 
mouth  but  out  there  flies  a  blunder."  Kef  erring  to 
Butler's  contempt  for  Kansas  and  pride  in  his  own 
state,  Sunnier  said:  "South  Carolina  counts  by 
centuries  where  Kansas  counts  by  years.  But  a 
beneficent  example  may  be  born  in  a  day.  .  .  . 
Were  the  whole  history  of  South  Carolina  blotted 
out  of  existence,  from  its  very  beginning  to  the  day 
of  the  last  election  of  the  senator  to  his  present 
seat  on  this  floor,  civilization  might  lose — I  do  not 
say  how  little,  but  surely  less  than  it  has  already 
gained  by  the  example  of  Kansas  in  that  valiant 
struggle  against  oppression,  and  in  the  develop 
ment  of  a  new  science  of  emigration.  .  .  . 
Throughout  this  infant  territory  there  is  more  of 
educated  talent  in  proportion  to  its  inhabitants 
than  in  his  vaunted  'state.'  Ah,  sir,  I  tell  you 
that  Kansas,  welcomed  as  a  free  state,  '  a  ministering 
angel  shall  be '  to  the  republic,  when  South  Caro- 


198  CHARLES  SUMNER 

lina,  in  the  cloak  of  darkness  which  she  hugs,  '  lies 
howling.'  " 

Of  Mason  he  spoke  as  one  who,  "  as  author  of  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Bill,  had  associated  himself  with  a 
special  act  of  inhumanity  and  tyranny. "  "  He  holds 
the  commission  of  Virginia, — of  that  other  Virginia 
from  which  Washington  and  Jefferson  avert  their 
faces,  where  human  beings  are  bred  as  cattle  for  the 
shambles,  and  a  dungeon  rewards  the  pious  matron 
who  teaches  children  to  relieve  their  bondage  by 
reading  the  Book  of  Life.  It  is  proper  that  such 
a  senator,  representing  such  a  state,  should  rail 
against  free  Kansas/7 

Watchful  as  had  been  his  opponents  for  any  op 
portunity  against  him,  not  once  in  the  whole  course 
of  his  speech  was  Sumner  called  to  order.  His 
eloquence  and  intense  earnestness  made  a  tre 
mendous  impression,  and  he  was  acclaimed  as  the 
peer  of  the  greatest  orators  and  statesmen  of  Eng 
land  and  America.  But  Douglas  and  Mason 
writhed  under  the  excoriation  he  had  administered. 
Douglas  spoke  of  the  "depths  of  malignity  that 
issued  from  every  sentence'7;  he  affected  to  be 
shocked  by  the  l  i  lasciviousness  and  obscenity  ' '  of 
Sumner's  speech,  and  ridiculed  him  for  "  practic 
ing  his  speech  every  night  before  the  glass  with  a 
negro  boy  to  hold  the  candle  and  watch  the 
gestures," — a  charge  to  which  Sumner' s  scorching 
rejoinder  promptly  gave  the  lie.  But  what  rankled 
most  was  Sumner' s  denunciation  of  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  Bill  as  "in  every  respect  a  swindle." 


"THE  CK1ME  AGAINST  KANSAS"      199 

"Is  it  his  object,"  cried  Douglas,  "to  provoke 
some  of  us  to  kick  him  as  we  would  a  dog  in  the 
street,  that  he  may  get  sympathy  upon  his  just 
chastisement  ? ' '  — words  which  took  on  a  dark  sig 
nificance  from  the  events  of  the  next  few  hours. 

Angry  censure  came  from  others  as  well.  Mason 
denounced  Sumner  as  "a  cunning  artificer  or 
forger,  who  knows  no  other  use  of  truth  than  to 
give  currency  to  falsehood,"  and  deplored  the 
political  necessity  of  tolerating  him  in  the  Senate, 
whereas  elsewhere  he  would  not  be  recognized  "as 
possessing  manhood  in  any  form";  his  very 
presence  would  be  "dishonor"  and  "  the  touch  of 
his  hand  would  be  a  disgrace."  To  such  low  per 
sonalities  Sumner  would  doubtless  have  turned  a 
deaf  ear,  had  he  not  been  convinced  that  patience 
in  face  of  the  Southerners'  swaggering  arrogance 
had  ceased  to  be  a  virtue.  He  fronted  Douglas 
with  scorn  ;  advancing  toward  him,  and  pointing 
his  finger  defiantly  at  him,  he  said  : 

"Let  the  senator  remember  hereafter  that  the 
bowie-knife  and  bludgeon  are  not  proper  emblems 
of  senatorial  debate.  Let  him  remember  that  the 
swagger  of  Bob  Acres  and  the  ferocity  of  the  Malay 
caunot  add  to  the  dignity  of  this  body.  .  .  . 
I  will  not  descend  to  things  that  dropped  so  natur 
ally  from  his  tongue.  I  only  brand  them  to  his  face 
as  false.  I  say  also  to  that  senator — and  I  wish  him 
to  bear  it  in  mind — that  no  person  with  the  upright 
form  of  man  can  be  allowed "  (hesitation). 

Douglas:   "Say  it." 


200  CHAELES  SUMNER 

Sumner  :  "  I  will  say  it.  No  person  with  the  up 
right  form  of  man  can  be  allowed  without  violation 
of  all  decency,  to  switch  out  from  his  tongue  the 
perpetual  stench  of  offensive  personality.  Sir,  that 
is  not  a  proper  weapon  of  debate,  at  least  on  this 
floor.  The  noisome,  squat  and  nameless  animal,  to 
which  I  refer,  is  not  the  proper  model  for  an  Amer 
ican  senator.  Will  the  senator  from  Illinois  take 
notice?" 

Douglas:  "I  will,  and  so  will  not  imitate  you, 
sir." 

Sumner  :  u  I  did  not  hear  the  senator." 

Douglas:  "I  said,  if  that  be  the  case,  I  would 
certainly  never  imitate  you  in  that  capacity,  recog 
nizing  the  force  of  the  illustration." 

Sumner:  "Mr.  President,  again  the  senator 
switches  his  tongue,  and  again  he  fills  the  senate 
with  its  offensive  odor.  I  pass  from  the  senator 
from  Illinois. 

"  There  was  still  another— the  senator  from  Vir 
ginia — who  is  now  also  in  my  eye.  That  senator 
said  nothing  of  argument,  and  therefore  there  is 
nothing  of  that  for  response.  I  simply  say  to  him 
that  hard  words  are  not  arguments,  frowns  are  not 
reasons,  nor  do  scowls  belong  to  the  proper  arsenal 
of  parliamentary  debate.  The  senator  has  not  for 
gotten  that  on  a  former  occasion  I  did  something  to 
exhibit  the  plantation  manners  which  he  displays." 

1  In  passing  judgment  upon  the  mode  of  speech  which  Sum 
ner  allowed  himself  in  this  debate,  it  must  be  remembered  that 
he  .had  heretofore  submitted  to  the  most  galling  epithets,  and 


"THE  CEIME  AGAINST  KANSAS"      201 

Among  Sumner' s  friends  there  was  not  a  little  ap 
prehension  as  to  the  consequences  to  which  such  a 
speech  might  lead.  Douglas's  words  had  seemed  to 
hint  at  personal  violence,  and  after  the  session 
Wilson  and  one  or  two  others  told  Sumiier  that  they 
were  going  home  with  him.  When  Sumner  caught 
their  meaning,  he  immediately  dismissed  their  sug 
gestion  of  acting  as  his  body-guard.  "None  of 
that,  Wilson,"  said  he.  Now,  as  at  other  critical 
junctures,  he  showed  himself  almost  fatalistically 
insensible  to  fear,  and  continued  to  walk  alone  about 
the  streets  of  the  capital.1 

that  unbridled  license  had  repeatedly  been  used  by  Douglas  and 
his  allies  in  assailing  the  leaders  of  the  North.  That  these 
masters  of  senatorial  billingsgate  had  now  met  with  "  majestic, 
elegant  and  crushing  "  rebuke  from  Sumner  gave  profound  sat 
isfaction  and  encouragement  to  anti-slavery  men  throughout  the 
country.  Said  Parker  to  Sumner,  after  his  speech  :  ''  You  had 
all  three  of  them  at  once  on  the  point  of  your  spear."  Sum- 
ner's  own  vindication  of  his  severity  of  speech  on  such  occasions 
he  stated  thus  to  a  friend  :  "  There  is  a  time  for  everything  ; 
and  when  crime  and  criminals  are  thrust  before  us,  they  are  to 
be  met  by  all  the  energies  that  God  has  given  us,  by  argument, 
scorn  and  denunciation.  The  whole  arsenal  of  God  is  ours ; 
and  I  will  not  renounce  one  of  its  weapons, — not  one.  That  is 
my  opinion,  formed  in  experience  and  tried  by  tranquil  medi 
tation."  Letters  of  hearty  congratulation  and  appreciation 
came  pouring  in  upon  him.  The  speech  was  issued  in  enor 
mous  editions ;  it  is  estimated  that  within  two  months  of  its  de 
livery  a  million  copies  had  been  distributed.  It  was  reprinted 
in  England,  and  translated  into  Welsh  and  German. 

1  "  1  don't  believe  he  knew  what  fear  was.  Perhaps  it  detracts 
from  his  credit  that  he  didn't  know  what  fear  was.  Richard 
Dana  said  once,  describing  him  :  '  He  is  a  cat  without  smellers.' 
That  is  he  has  none  of  the  delicate  tests  that,  as  he  passes  along, 
tell  him  what  he  touches.  He  wanted  that  timidity  which  rec 
ognizes  the  opposition  to  him,  and  so  he  passed  bravely  on." 
—Wendell  Phillips,  oration  reported  in  Boston  Daily  Advertiser, 
March  13,  1877. 


202  CHAELES  SUMNER 

But  meantime  a  self-constituted  champion  of  the 
South  was  nerving  himself  to  avenge  what  he  deemed 
the  insults  that  had  been  heaped  upon  her.  Preston 
S.  Brooks  had  come  to  Congress  in  1853  from  an  up 
state  district  of  South  Carolina.  In  the  war  with 
Mexico  he  had  headed  a  company  of  volunteers,  but 
illness  had  prevented  his  seeing  active  service.  In 
the  House  he  had  been  orderly  in  his  conduct,  had 
once  helped  stop  a  personal  encounter  between  mem 
bers,  and  had  introduced  a  resolution  against  the 
bringing  of  concealed  weapons.  He  was  considered 
less  of  a  "  fire-eater  "  than  many  of  his  Southern 
colleagues,  and  was  on  quite  friendly  terms  with 
some  Northern  members.  Brooks,  who  was  later 
referred  to  as  Butler's  "  nephew  "  and  "near  kins 
man,"  was  the  son  of  the  senator's  cousin.  He  had 
heard  a  part  of  Sumner's  speech  on  the  first  day, 
and  resented  what  he  denounced  as  insults  to  his 
kinsman  and  to  his  state.  From  his  own  testiinon3r 
it  seems  probable  that  his  real  grievance  was  Sum- 
ner's  attack  upon  "  the  harlot,  Slavery,"  and  the 
devotion  which  she  received  from  Southern  leaders, 
and  that  others,  of  more  brutal  mind  than  he,  urged 
him  on  as  the  champion  of  his  outraged  section, 
working  upon  his  relationship  to  Butler  as  affording 
both  the  natural  reason  why  he  should  act  and  a 
possible  defense  in  case  of  court  proceedings. 
Brooks  complained  of  Sumner's  speech  the  first  day ; 
the  second  day,  comments  of  colleagues  and  in  so 
cial  circles  stung  him  to  more  definite  thoughts  of 
vengeance.  On  the  following  day,  he  broached  the 


"THE  CRIME  AGAINST  KANSAS"      203 

matter  which  was  burdening  his  mind  to  Edmund- 
son  of  Virginia,  laying  stress,  so  the  latter  said, 
upon  Simmer's  characterization  of  South  Carolina  as 
"disgracefully  impotent  during  the  Eevolution,  and 
still  more  so  on  account  of  slavery."  Brooks  urged 
his  colleague  to  be  present  as  a  friend,  but  Edmund- 
son's  saying  that  he  had  only  a  "  little  briar  stick  " 
with  him  showed  that  he  understood  Brooks  really 
wished  him  to  be  prepared  for  active  assistance. 
They  stalked  their  prey  in  the  Capitol  and  through 
its  grounds,  but  did  not  find  him.  The  following 
day,  Edmundson  came  upon  Brooks  lying  in  wait  for 
Suumer  at  the  entrance  to  the  Capitol  grounds,  with 
the  intention  of  attacking  him  there,  or,  in  case  he 
drove  to  the  Capitol,  of  passing  up  the  steps  and  ac 
costing  him  at  the  East  Front,  on  his  way  to  the 
Senate.  Edmuudson  dissuaded  him  from  this  course, 
lest  the  exertion  of  hurrying  up  the  steps  should  un 
fit  him  for  a  contest  with  Sumner,  whom  both  these 
ruffians  thought  to  be  Brooks' s  superior  in  strength. 
Accordingly  Brooks  went  to  the  Senate  chamber, 
where  his  companion  joined  him.  While  a  eulogy 
was  being  pronounced  upon  a  deceased  member, 
Brooks  stood  in  the  aisle  a  few  feet  from  Sumner' s 
chair.  Upon  the  Senate's  adjournment,  most  of  the 
members  left  the  chamber,  Brooks  taking  a  vacated 
seat,  separated  by  two  from  the  one  where  Sumner 
was  sitting.  The  presence  of  a  woman  in  the  gal 
lery  embarrassed  Brooks' s  sense  of  gallantry.  He 
asked  one  of  the  attendants  to  get  her  to  leave,  and 
when  this  supposedly  whimsical  request  was  not 


204  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

complied  with,  he  went  out  to  ask  Edmund- 
son's  advice  as  to  whether  it  would  not  be  best 
to  send  in  his  card  to  Sumuer.  He  was  dis 
suaded  on  the  ground  that  Sumner  would  prob 
ably  not  leave  his  work  but  would  summon  him  to 
his  desk. 

Free  of  interruptipns,  Sumuer  had  settled  to  his 
writing,  drawing  his  chair  up  close  to  the  desk  over 
which  he  was  bent,  absorbed  in  his  work.  A  chiv 
alrous  knight  might  never  again  hope  to  have  his 
victim  more  completely  at  his  mercy,  for  the  desk, 
firmly  fastened  to  the  floor,  pinioned  him  ;  until  he 
should  have  time  to  push  back  his  chair,  it  would 
be  impossible  for  him  to  rise. 

Suddenly  Sumner  heard  his  name  called.  Look 
ing  up,  he  saw  a  tall,  dark -faced  stranger,  who, 
without  giving  his  name,  said :  u  I  have  read  your 
speech  over  twice  carefully  ;  it  is  a  libel  on  South 
Carolina  and  Mr.  Butler,  who  is  a  relative  of  mine  " 
— and  down  upon  the  head  of  the  defenseless  man 
crashed  a  blow  from  a  heavy  gutta-percha  cane. 
Half-stunned,  Sumner  struggled  to  rise  ;  the  blows 
still  continued,  but  the  desk  held  him,  till  he 
wrenched  it  from  its  iron  fastenings.  As  he 
staggered  toward  his  assailant,  Brooks  seized  him 
by  the  collar  and  still  rained  blows  at  his  head. 
The  cane  broke,  but  the  furious  blows  did  not  cease 
till  Sumner  sank  bleeding  to  the  floor. 

The  Senate  chamber  was  almost  empty  at  the 
time.  So  swiftly  and  without  warning  had  the 
assault  been  made  that  not  till  Sumner  was  falling 


"THE  CEIME  AGAINST  KANSAS''      205 

did  aoy  one  reach  his  side.  Surprise  and  lack  of 
presence  of  mind  hindered  some,  but  there  were 
others  who  deliberately  held  back.  Toonibs,  stand 
ing  near  by,  saw  the  first  blow  and  watched  the 
assault  with  approval.  Keitt,  Brooks' s  colleague, 
who  had  been  awaiting  his  action,  immediately 
rushed  forward,  brandishing  a  cane  and  with  hand 
on  pistol,  shouting,  "Let  them  alone  !"  He  even 
threatened  the  venerable  Senator  Crittenden,  who 
was  trying  to  get  between  the  assailant  and  his 
victim.  Slidell  and  Douglas  were  in  the  anteroom, 
when  the  shout  was  heard  that  some  one  was  as 
saulting  Suuiner.  Slidell,  who  years  before  had 
assured  Sumner  of  his  grateful  appreciation  of  his 
"chivalrous  and  zealous  advocacy"  in  defense  of 
his  brother,  now  "felt  no  emotion  at  hearing  the 
remark.  I  remained  very  quietly  in  my  seat.  .  .  . 
I  have  no  association  of  relations  of  any  kind  with 
Mr.  Sumner.  ...  I  did  not  think  it  necessary 
to  express  my  sympathy  or  make  any  advances  to 
ward  him."  Despite  his  own  menacing  words, 
Douglas  denied  that  he  had  had  the  slightest  sus 
picion  that  any  violence  was  to  be  offered  Sumner  ; 
he  acknowledged  that  his  first  impulse  had  been 
"to  help  put  an  end  to  the  affray  ;  but  it  occurred 
to  my  mind  in  an  instant  that  if  I  came  into  the 
hall  my  motives  would  be  misconstrued,  and  I  sat 
down  again." 

As  friends  gathered  about  the  stricken  senator,  it 
was  thought  that  he  could  not  survive.  He  was 
bruised  upon  the  face,  arms  and  shoulders,  while 


206  CHARLES  SUMKEB 

blood  flowed  copiously  from  two  long  wounds,  deep 
and  very  ragged,  on  the  back  of  his  head,  which 
cut  to  the  bone  and  down  under  the  scalp.  But  for 
his  heavy  mass  of  hair,  instant  death  would  proba 
bly  have  resulted  from  such  blows.  Wilson  took 
the  half -conscious  man  to  his  lodgings.  With  un 
daunted  spirit,  he  declared  that  he  would  renew  the 
conflict  with  slavery  as  soon  as  he  could  return  to 
his  post.  But  the  next  day,  for  the  first  time  since 
he  had  entered  the  Senate,  the  seat  of  Charles  Suin- 
ner  was  vacant. 

When  the  Senate  convened,  by  previous  arrange 
ment  among  the  Republicans,  Wilson  made  a  brief 
statement  of  what  had  occurred.  There  was  a 
pause.  It  had  been  hoped  that  some  member  of 
the  majority  would  make  a  motion  for  a  committee 
of  investigation,  but  none  of  them  stirred.  As  the 
presiding  officer  was  about  to  proceed  to  the  regular 
business  of  the  day,  Seward  moved  that  a  com 
mittee  of  inquiry  be  chosen.  No  objection  was  in 
terposed,  and  it  was  passed  without  debate,  after 
being  amended,  however,  so  that  the  committee 
should  be  chosen  by  the  Senate.  Had  ordinary 
precedent  been  followed,  the  presiding  officer  would 
have  named  Seward  chairman  of  the  committee  and 
have  given  fair  representation  to  the  minority,  but 
the  Senate  proceeded  to  elect  a  committee  made  up 
exclusively  of  Democrats.  Five  days  later  this 
committee  submitted  a  terse  report,  which,  without 
comment  upon  the  nature  of  the  outrage,  merely 
declared  that  the  assault  constituted  a  breach  of  the 


"THE  CRIME  AGAINST  KANSAS  "      207 

privileges  of  the  Senate,  but  that  it  lay  outside  the 
Senate's  jurisdiction  and  was  punishable  only  by 
the  House  of  which  Brooks  was  a  member.  The 
committee's  recommendation  that  their  report  and 
affidavits  be  transmitted  to  the  House  was  im 
mediately  adopted  by  the  Senate. 

Meantime,  in  the  House,  Clingman  of  North 
Carolina  had  tried  to  block  a  motion  of  inquiry  by 
making  the  point  that  there  was  no  question  of 
privilege,  as  the  assault  was  not  committed  on  a 
member  of  the  House.  But  the  Speaker  ruled 
against  him,  and  the  resolution  was  passed  by  a 
vote  of  about  three  to  two.  The  Speaker  then  ap 
pointed  a  committee  consisting  of  three  Northern 
Republicans  and  two  Southern  Democrats.  After 
a  week  spent  in  taking  testimony  and  deliberating, 
the  committee  by  a  vote  of  three  to  two  declared 
Brooks  guilty  of  an  assault  and  of  disorderly  be 
havior  and  recommended  his  expulsion  and  the 
censure  of  Edmundson  and  Keitt.  The  two  South 
ern  members  dissented  in  a  "  coarse  tissue  of 
sophistry,"  insisting  that  the  House  had  no  juris 
diction,  since  the  assault  was  not  committed  on  a 
member  of  the  House  nor  while  the  House  was  in 
session. 

Though  the  Senate  resolution  had  been  passed 
without  debate,  the  subject  came  before  that  body 
some  days  later  through  personal  explanations  which 
several  of  the  members  sought  to  make  as  to  allega 
tions  contained  in  the  affidavits.  Toombs's  frank 
avowal  of  his  approval  of  the  assault  called  from 


208  CHABLES  SUMNEB 

Wade  the  ringing  challenge  :  "If  the  principle  now 
announced  ['an  assassin-like,  cowardly  attack  upon 
a  man  unarmed ']  is  to  prevail,  let  us  come  armed  for 
the  combat ;  and  although  you  are  four  to  one,  I  am 
here  to  meet  you.  God  knows  a  man  can  die  in  no 
better  cause  than  in  vindicating  the  rights  of  de 
bate  on  this  floor.'7  Wilson  declared  :  "Mr.  Suin- 
ner  was  stricken  down  on  this  floor  by  a  brutal, 

murderous,  and  cowardly  assault "     "You  are 

a  liar  ! ' '  shouted  Butler,  starting  forward  as  if  to 
attack  him,  but  other  senators  interposed  and  per 
suaded  him  to  withdraw  his  words. 

A  fortnight  later,  however,  in  the  debate  on  the 
Kansas  bill,  Butler  recurred  to  Sunnier' s  speech, 
declaring  that,  had  he  been  present,  he  would  not 
have  submitted  to  such  insults.  He  expressed  ap 
proval  of  all  of  Brooks' s  conduct;  professed  to  be 
lieve  that  Surnner  was  little  hurt  and  now  was 
"shamming";  referred  to  him  as  a  "criminal 
aggressor,"  a  "degenerate  son  of  Massachusetts," 
like  Thersites  in  i  i  deserving  what  that  brawler  re 
ceived  from  the  hands  of  the  gallant  Ulysses  "  ;  and 
implied  that  Sumner  would  have  had  far  less  social 
currency,  had  not  he  (Butler)  at  the  first  maintained 
intercourse  with  him.  Wilson  ridiculed  as  a  "  piny- 
wood  doctrine"  this  assumption  of  social  superi 
ority,  and  proceeded  by  authoritative  quotations 
from  Butler's  speeches  to  prove  that  for  a  long  time 
he  had  been  the  aggressor,  nagging  Suinner  with 
the  most  insulting  epithets  and  in  most  offensive 
manner.  To  this  Butler  made  a  rather  shamefaced 


"THE  CRIME  AGADsST  KANSAS"      209 

reply.  Seward,  who  had  been  strangely  reluctant 
to  speak,  even  now  seemed  unduly  conciliatory  in 
compliments  to  the  South  ;  but  he  spoke  most  feel 
ingly  of  {Sunnier  as  "a  cherished  personal  friend 
and  political  associate "  and  declared  with  sure 
prophecy  :  *  *  The  blows  that  fell  on  the  head  of  the 
senator  from  Massachusetts  have  done  more  for  the 
cause  of  human  freedom  in  Kansas  and  in  the  terri- 1 
tories  of  the  United  States  than  all  the  eloquence 
which  has  resounded  in  these  halls  from, 
the  days  when  Euf us  King  asserted  that  cause  in 
this  chamber,  and  when  John  Quiucy  Adams  de 
fended  it  in  the  other  house,  until  the  present 
hour." 

The  promise  of  the  first  few  days  that  Sunnier 
would  soon  be  back  in  his  seat  was  not  fulfilled. 
Violent  pain  and  fever  came  on.  One  of  his  wounds 
had  to  be  opened,  and  for  a  few  days  his  con 
dition  was  critical.  After  he  had  rallied  a  little,  he 
was  taken  to  the  country,  but  the  wound  still  re 
fused  to  heal,  and  he  complained  of  dull  feelings  in 
his  head  which  made  him  fear  the  approach  of 
paralysis.  He  was  in  Washington  again  for  a  few 
days  in  July,  and  many  anti-slavery  men  in 
Congress  and  members  of  the  diplomatic  corps 
called  to  inquire  for  him,  but  no  call  or  word  of 
sympathy  came  from  adherents  of  the  administra 
tion  with  the  exception  of  Cass.  Seven  weeks  after 
the  assault  he  went  to  Philadelphia,  to  put  himself 
in  the  care  of  an  eminent  physician. 

In  these  days  of  Suinner's  prostration,  the  national 


•J10  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

conventions  were  held.  In  the  Eepublican  assem 
bly  not  a  few  votes  were  cast,  especially  by  New 
York  delegates,  for  Sunmer  as  nominee  for  the  vice- 
presidency.  It  was  said  that  his  nomination  was 
prevented  only  by  the  Massachusetts  delegation 
formally  withdrawing  his  name. 

On  the  very  day  that  Suniner  left  Wash 
ington,  occurred  Brooks' s  trial  in  the  circuit 
court  of  the  District  of  Columbia  on  the  charge  of 
assault.  He  made  no  denial,  but  declared  he 
had  acted  as  would  a  husband  avenging  his  out 
raged  honor.  The  court  imposed  on  him  no 
other  penalty  than  the  trifling  fine  of  three  hundred 
dollars. 

Two  days  later  began  the  debate  in  the  House  on 
the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  assault.  Most  of 
the  speakers  laid  chief  stress  on  the  contention  that 
the  House  had  no  jurisdiction.  But  others  did  not 
hesitate  to  justify  the  assault  in  every  respect.  No 
attention  was  paid  to  Butler's  grievance.  Espe 
cially  forward  in  praising  Brooks' s  championship 
of  the  South  were  Clingmau,  who  maintained  "the 
liberty  of  the  cudgel,"  and  Savage  of  Tennessee, 
who  declared  that  Brooks,  "instead  of  deserving 
punishment,  merited  the  highest  commendation," 
and  that  Sumner  *  *  did  not  get  a  lick  more  than  he 
deserved."  Most  impressive  was  the  speech  of 
Giddings,  himself  a  hero  of  the  struggle  for  free 
speech  in  the  House.  The  vote  stood  one  hun 
dred  and  twenty-one  to  ninety-five  in  favor  of 
expulsion,  thus  falling  far  short  of  the  requisite  two- 


"THE  CRIME  AGAINST  KANSAS7'      211 

thirds.  After  the  vote  had  been  declared,  Brooks 
obtained  the  floor  and  made  a  braggart's  speech. 
He  showed  with  disgusting  clearness  the  deliber 
ation  with  which  the  assault  was  planned,  explaining 
his  choice  of  a  cane  rather  than  a  whip,  so  that  he 
might  get  the  firmer  grip  j  he  implied  that  he  was 
provided  with  some  deadly  weapon  for  use  in  case 
Sunmer  had  wrenched  the  cane  away  from  him. 
He  referred  in  insulting  terms  to  anti-slavery  mem 
bers,  speaking  of  Comins,  with  whom  he  had  previ 
ously  sought  association,  as  a  "  poltroon  and  a  puppy, 
.  .  .  a  cock  that  crows  and  won't  fight,  despised 
by  the  hens  and  even  by  the  pullets."  By  her  reso 
lutions  condemning  the  attack,  he  declared  that 
Massachusetts  had  "  given  additional  proof  that  she 
neither  comprehends  the  theory  of  our  government 
nor  is  loyal  to  its  authority."  To  those  who  had 
voted  for  his  expulsion  he  said  that  "for  all  future 
time  his  self-respect  required  that  he  should  pass  them 
as  strangers."  He  thereupon  announced  his  resig 
nation,  and  strode  from  the  chamber,  to  be  over 
whelmed  at  its  door  by  the  kisses  and  embraces  of 
Southern  women.  The  resolution  of  censure  upon 
Edmuudson  was  defeated,  largely  on  the  ground 
that  he  was  not  present  at  the  assault.  Keitt  was 
censured  by  a  vote  of  one  hundred  and  ninety-six 
to  ninety-six.  He  thereupon  made  a  brutal  speech, 
in  which  he  declared  that  Brooks  "redressed  a 
wrong  to  his  blood  and  his  state  and  he  did  it  in 
a  fair  and  manly  way."  He,  too,  resigned.  And 
within  three  weeks  each  of  these  heroes  had  been 


212  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

vindicated  by  reelection  to  bis  seat  by  a  practically 
unanimous  vote.1 

Brooks  challenged  a  Massachusetts  member  to  a 
duel  for  denouncing  the  assault  "  in  the  name  of 
that  fair  play  which  bullies  and  prize-fighters  re 
spect,"  but  later  declined  to  go  to  the  place  in 
Canada  selected  for  the  combat.  Wilson's  con 
demnation  of  the  affair  as  "brutal,  murderous  and 
cowardly"  called  forth  a  challenge.  Wilson  con 
temptuously  declined  to  fight  a  duel  with  him,  but 
gave  it  to  be  understood  that  he  should  be  prepared 
to  defend  himself.  Brooks  continued  to  breathe 
out  threateniugs,  but  men  who  called  him  coward, 
ruffian  and  bully  went  unscathed,  for  Brooks  as 
sumed  the  role  of  avenger  only  when  his  victim  was 
unarmed  and  pinioned. 

The  extended  account  which  has  been  given  of 
this  assault  would  be  entirely  disproportionate, 
were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  throughout  the  slave 
states  Brooks' s  act  received  ardent  approval  as  a 
valiant  deed  for  the  honor  of  the  South.  "Good 
in  conception,  better  in  execution,  and  best  of  all  in 
consequences,"  was  the  comment  of  the  Eichmond 
Enquirer,  and  it  called  for  like  treatment  in  the  case 
of  other  Northerners  who  should  dare  "slander  the 


*In  a  speech  at  a  banquet  given  in  his  honor,  Brooks  declared 
himself,  in  this  deed,  ''the  type  and  representative  of  the  en 
tire  South."  In  an  address  issued  to  his  iionstitnents,  he  urged 
them  to  elect  him  with  un.'miinity,  "  if  1  have  represented  you 
faithfully."  And  in  his  entire  district  only  six  votes  were  cast 
against  him. 


"THE  CEIME  AGAINST  KANSAS"       213 

South."1  Siinms,  the  most  eminent  Southern  man 
of  letters,  justified  the  attack,  and  even  approved 
it  in  New  York  in  words  which  deeply  incensed  his 
hearers.  Jefferson  Davis  wrote  to  Brooks,  com 
mending  both  his  act  and  his  character.  He  was 
hailed  as  the  representative  of  Southern  chivalry 
and  presented  a  gold-headed  cane  by  the  students 
of  the  University  of  Virginia,  the  greatest  centre  of 
culture  in  the  South,  while  a  dozen  canes  and  other 
evidences  of  admiration  came  from  various  places 
in  the  slave  states. 

Throughout  the  North  there  was  absolute  una 
nimity  in  condemning  the  assault.  It  was  every 
where  recognized  as  an  attack  upon  constitutional 
liberty,  evidencing  a  determination  to  suppress  free 
speech,  just  as  at  the  very  same  time  other  ruffians 
were  suppressing  free  speech  and  a  free  ballot  in 
Kansas.  The  legislatures  of  Massachusetts,  Connec 
ticut,  Ehode  Island  and  Vermont  passed  stinging 
resolutions,  which  were  presented  in  Congress.  In 
many  of  the  great  cities  of  the  North  public  meetings 
of  protest  were  attended  by  thousands  and  addressed 
by  such  men  as  Henry  Ward  Beecher,  William 
Cullen  Byrant,  William  M.  Evarts,  Francis  Way- 
laud,  E.  Eockwood  Hoar,  Longfellow  and  Quincy, 
Holmes  and  Emerson.  At  the  formal  recommeuda- 

1  The  Charleston  Mercury  of  July  21,  1856,  commented  on 
the  assault :  "  The  whole  affair  has  been  most  oppor 
tune.  ...  He  [Brooks]  has  from  the  first  conducted  him 
self  with  good  taste,  good  judgment,  and  good  spirit."  Sum- 
ner  "  is  dead  in  the  esteem  of  every  man  not  a  poltroon.  North 
or  South," 


214  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

tion  of  the  governor  of  Massachusetts,  a  resolution 
was  introduced  in  the  legislature  that  the  common 
wealth  defray  the  expenses  of  Sumner' s  illness,  and 
a  popular  subscription  was  started  to  provide  a 
testimonial  in  recognition  of  his  championship  of 
freedom  in  the  Senate.  Later  this  desire  to  show 
popular  approval  led  to  the  proposal  that  Sumner 
be  nominated  for  governor,  with  the  expectation 
that  he  would  serve  only  from  January  till  March 
and  then  resign.  But  Sumner  vetoed  all  three  pro 
posals,  requesting  that  the  contributions  be  devoted 
to  the  cause  of  freedom  in  Kansas.  From  all  sides 
came  expressions  of  sympathy  and  appreciation  of 
his  service.  As  many  as  350  letters  of  such  import 
were  received  within  six  weeks  of  the  assault.  It 
has  been  suggested  that  these  would  afford  an  in 
teresting  contrast,  both  as  to  their  spirit  and  the 
character  of  their  writers,  if  they  could  be  placed 
in  comparison  with  the  letters  of  the  same  period 
received  by  Brooks,  Butler  and  Douglas.  Aca 
demic  recognition  was  shown  in  the  bestowal  upon 
Sumner  of  the  degree  of  LL.  D.  by  both  Amherst 
and  Yale,  but  not  till  three  years  later  by  his  alma 
mater.  Tributes  of  sympathy  and  affection  came 
from  abroad,  where  the  significance  of  the  Brooks 
assault  was  clearly  seen  by  keen  observers.  "  That 
outrage,"  said  Cornewall  Lewis,  "  is  no  proof  of 
brutal  manners  or  low  morality  in  America  ;  it  is 
the  first  blow  in  a  civil  war."  * 

In   search   of  health,  Sumner  went  first  to  the 
'Morley,  Life  of  Gladstone,  Vol.  I,  p.  441. 


"THE  CRIME  AGAINST  KANSAS"      215 

shore  and  then  to  the  mountains,  but  the  gains 
were  slow  and  slight.  He  was  much  troubled  by 
insomnia,  by  a  feeling  of  weight  on  the  brain,  and 
by  throbbing  pains  in  his  head.  Friends  and 
physicians  noted  with  apprehension  his  pallor,  his 
tottering  steps  and  his  exhaustion  even  from  slight 
effort.  His  letters  frequently  reveal  a  dread  of 
"  the  possibility  of  life  with  shattered  nerves  and 
perhaps  with  a  brain  that  has  lost  its  powers. " 

As  the  time  of  the  national  election  approached, 
Sunmer,  who  was  then  under  treatment  in  Phila 
delphia,  determined  to  return  to  Boston  to  vote  for 
Fremont.  Forthwith  came  a  committee  of  citizens, 
tendering  a  banquet.  This  he  declined,  but  was 
prevailed  upon  to  accept  a  public  reception,  which 
was  carried  out  in  such  manner  as  to  make  it  a 
most  impressive  tribute  of  sympathy,  appreciation 
and  admiration.  Sunnier  came  first  to  Longfellow's 
home.  The  following  day  he  went  to  Brookline; 
here  he  was  met  by  distinguished  citizens  and 
escorted  to  the  Boston  line,  where  waited  a  "caval 
cade"  of  nearly  700  citizens  as  an  escort.  He  was 
presented  to  the  mayor  and  was  most  feelingly 
greeted  by  him  and  by  the  venerable  Josiah  Quincy. 
He  entered  the  carriage,  which  was  drawn  by  six 
gray  horses,  and  the  procession,  nearly  half  a  mile 
in  length,  advanced  to  the  front  of  the  State  House. 
The  streets  were  decorated  with  banners,  festoons 
and  arches ;  flags  were  flying  and  bouquets  were 
thrown  into  his  carriage.  The  streets  leading  to 
the  State  House  were  thronged  with  people.  Here 


216  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  senator  was  presented  to  the  governor  of  the 
commonwealth,     who    welcomed     the     * i  eloquent 

/  orator,  the  accomplished  scholar,  and  the  ackuowl- 
'  edged  statesman,  .  .  .  the  earnest  friend  of  suf 
fering  humanity  and  of  every  good  cause,  .  .  . 
the  successful  defender  of  the  honor  and  integrity 
of  Massachusetts."  Suniner  started  to  reply,  but 
his  strength  was  already  overtaxed,  and  after  a  few 
words  of  appreciation,  he  was  forced  to  abandon 
the  effort.  After  nine  cheers  from  the  thronging 
thousands,  Sumuer  was  escorted  to  his  own  home, 
near  at  hand,  where  his  mother  awaited  him.  The 
street  before  the  house  was  soon  packed,  and  again 
and  again  mother  and  son  had  to  appear  at  the 
window.  Yet  in  all  the  excitement  and  high- 
wrought  feeling  of  that  day  there  was  no  mention  of 
the  assailant,  no  hint  of  vengeance. 

In  the  ensuing  election  Fremont  carried  Massa 
chusetts  by  a  majority  of  50,000;  the  Kepublicaii 
candidate  was  reflected  to  Congress,  and  the  Re 
publicans  secured  a  majority  in  the  state  legislature. 
At  the  opening  of  Congress  the  Republicans  carried 
themselves  with  confidence  born  of  the  knowledge 
that  they  had  elected  a  majority  of  the  next  House. 
/Sumner  was  eager  to  get  back  to  his  post.  Sena- 

I  torial  service,  so  unattractive  to  him  at  first,  now 
kindled  his  most  intense  zeal.  To  Giddiugs  he  had 
written,  shortly  before  Congress  adjourned  :  "For 
three  weeks  of  this  session  I  woulclhave  given  three 
years  of  any  future  public  life."  Undaunted  by  all 
his  past  perils  and  sufferings,  he  now  wrote  to 


"THE  CEIME  AGAINST  KANSAS"      217 

"Wkittier  :  "I  loDg  to  speak  and  liberate  my  soul. 
If  I  ain  able  to  speak  as  I  desire,  I  think  that  I 
shall  be  shot.  Very  well,  I  am  content.  The 
cause  will  live.'7  l 

When  the  Massachusetts  legislature  convened,  it 
immediately  took  up  the  election  of  senator.  In 
the  House  there  were  three  hundred  and  thirty- 
three  votes  for  Suinner  to  twelve  for  all  others, 
while  in  the  Senate  every  vote  was  cast  for  him. 
Yet  six  years  before,  his  election  had  been  effected 
by  a  single  vote  at  the  end  of  the  longest  deadlock 
in  the  history  of  the  commonwealth,  and  a  year  later 
the  journals  of  the  Whig  party — now  dead — had 
called  upon  him  to  resign,  taunting  him  with  lack 
of  any  popular  support.  As  E.  H.  Dana,  Jr., 
wrote  :  "  No  one  can  now  say  that  you  have  not  a 
constituency  behind  you.  Where  is  there  a  senator 
who  holds  by  such  a  tenure  f  " 

But  his  progress  toward  recovery  was  tediously 
slow.2  At  the  opening  of  Congress  he  was  quite  un- 

1  December  20,  1856. 

'While  he  was  convalescing  at  his  home  in  Boston,  James 
Freeman  Clarke  called  one  day,  and  found  him  conversing  with 
three  gentlemen.  "He  introduced  one  of  them  to  me  as  Cap 
tain  John  Brown  of  Ossawatomie.  It  was  the  first  time  I  had 
ever  seen  John  Brown.  They  were  speaking  of  this  assault  by 
Preston  Brooks,  and  Mr.  Sumner  said :  '  The  coat  I  had  on 
at  the  time  is  hanging  in  that  closet.  Its  collar  is  stiff  with 
blood.  You  can  see  it,  if  you  please,  Captain.'  John  Brown 
arose,  went  to  the  closet,  slowly  opened  the  door,  carefully  took 
down  the  coat,  and  looked  at  it  for  a  few  minutes  with  the 
reverence  with  which  a  Roman  Catholic  regards  the  relics  of  a 
saint.  It  may  be  the  sight  of  that  garment  caused  him  to  feel 
a  still  deeper  abhorrence  of  slavery  and  to  take  a  stronger 
resolution  to  attack  it  in  its  strongholds.  So  the  blood  of  the 


218  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

able  to  attend  its  sessions.  Friends  begged  him  to 
take  no  risks,  and  earnestly  dissuaded  him  from 
any  thought  of  resigning,  urging  that  he  go  to 
Europe  and  seek  restoration  of  his  health.  He 
reached  Washington  a  week  before  the  end  of  the 
session,  and  on  February  26th  he  was  again  in  his 
seat,  vacant  since  the  22d  of  May.  From  Ee- 
publicans  he  received  a  cordial  welcome,  but  Demo 
crats  gave  him  no  sign  of  recognition.  Sumner 
found  himself  unable  to  stand  the  strain  of  the  ses 
sions.  He  had  come  to  Washington  to  cast  his  vote 
in  favor  of  reducing  the  tariff  rates  of  1846  on  raw 
materials,  especially  on  wool,  a  modification  then 
strongly  urged  by  the  manufacturers  of  New  Eng 
land.  He  was  summoned  when  votes  were  to  be 
taken,  and  at  two  stages  his  vote  was  decisive.  He 
was  sworn  in  for  his  second  term  March  4,  1857, 
and  was  assigned  to  the  Committee  on  Territories, 
under  the  chairmanship  of  Douglas.  Wilson  nomi 
nated  him  for  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Eelations, 
for  which  he  had  preeminent  qualifications,  but  this 
nomination  was  defeated  by  the  action  of  Seward, 
who  wanted  this  position  for  himself. 

On  the  7th  of  March,  Sumuer  sailed  for  France, 
honored  by  a  salute  of  thirty-one  guns,  fired  by  the 
Young  Men's  Eepublican  Club.  It  was  the  seventh 
anniversary  of  Webster's  Seventh  of  March  Speech, 


martyrs  is  the  seed  of  the  church." — Manorial  and  Biographical 
Sketches,  p.  102.  This  incident,  though  narrated  with  such 
particularity,  is  believed  to  be  apocryphal  by  Mr.  A.  B.  John 
son,  who  was  Sumner's  private  secretary. 


"THE  CEIME  AGAIKST  KANSAS"      219 

and  on  thtit  morning  was  published  the  Supreme 
Court's  decision  in  the  Dred  Scott  case. 

Meantime  Brooks  had  resumed  his  seat  with 
triumphant  air.  He  took  part  in  the  debates  early 
in  the  following  session ;  but  in  January  he  died 
very  suddenly  of  an  acute  inflammation  of  the  throat. 
In  the  House  friends  spoke  in  his  praise  ;  but  only 
Savage  ventured  to  refer  to  the  one  deed  by  which 
he  is  now  remembered,  assigning  to  Brooks  a  place 
in  history  by  the  side  of  Brutus.  At  this  many  of 
the  Eepublican  members  withdrew  from  the  hall. 
Brooks' a  remains  were  accorded  a  public  funeral  in 
South  Carolina  with  civic  and  military  honors. 
Upon  his  monument  in  the  village  of  his  birth  is 
carved  the  following  epitaph, — the  closing  sentences 
of  the  eulogy  pronounced  upon  him  in  Congress  by 
his  accomplice,  Keitt :  "Ever  able,  manly,  just, 
and  heroic,  illustrating  true  patriotism  by  devotion 
to  his  country,  the  whole  South  unites  with  his 
bereaved  family  in  deploring  his  untimely  end. 
1  Earth  has  never  pillowed  upon  her  bosom  a  truer 
sou,  nor  heaven  opened  wide  her  gates  to  receive  a 
manlier  spirit. '  " 

It  is  said  that  in  these  few  mouths  Brooks  had 
come  to  have  a  distaste  for  honors  thrust  upon  him 
as  the  "  representative  of  bullies,"  and  that  he  felt 
the  weight  of  history's  verdict  upon  his  "  brutal, 
murderous  and  cowardly  act."  As  Wilson  wrote  to 
Sumuer  on  the  day  of  his  death:  "His  enemies 
cannot  but  feel  sympathy  for  his  fate.  What  a 
name  to  leave  behind  him!"  Butler  died  a  few 


220  CHABLES  SUMNEB 

months  later,  on  almost  the  first  anniversary  of  the 
assault.  Keitt  met  his  death  fighting  for  the  Con 
federacy  in  1864. 

/  It  was  peculiarly  characteristic  of  Sumuer  that 
/he  cherished  no  resentment  toward  Brooks  nor  to 
ward  the  people  of  the  South.  His  only  war  was 
upon  slavery.  He  was  not  present  at  Brooks' s 
trial  for  assault  in  the  District  of  Columbia  court, 
and  declared  himself  indifferent  as  to  its  outcome. 
Years  later,  when  Brooks' s  name  was  mentioned  to 
him,  he  said  :  "  What  have  I  to  do  with  him  ?  It 
was  slavery,  not  he  that  struck  the  blow."  Two 
years  before  Simmer's  death,  George  William  Curtis 
called  his  attention  to  Brooks' s  cenotaph  in  the 
Congressional  cemetery,  where  his  remains  had 
been  temporarily  interred.  "  Poor  fellow,  poor  fel 
low,"  said  Sumner,  turning  away.  u  How  did  you 
feel  about  Brooks?"  Curtis  then  asked  him. 
Sumner  replied  :  "  Only  as  to  a  brick  that  should 
fall  upon  my  head  from  a  chimney.  He  was  the 
unconscious  agent  of  a  malign  power." 


CHAPTEE  XI 

IN   QUEST  OF  HEALTH 

SUMNER  reached  Paris  toward  the  end  of  March, 
having  followed  the  same  route  over  which  he  had 
come,  nineteen  years  before,  all  aglow  with  youthful 
enthusiasm.  He  came  now  heralded  by  a  reputation 
for  achievement  and  for  devotion  to  a  great  cause. 
But  his  first  concern  was  to  seek  out  Crawford,  the 
sculptor,  whom  he  had  befriended  so  effectively,  but 
whom  he  now  found  in  the  shadow  of  death  ;  they 
were  never  to  meet  again.  Surnner  spent  a  busy 
month  in  Paris,  during  which  he  greatly  enjoyed  so 
cial  meetings  and  frank  discussions  with  De  Tocque- 
ville  and  Guizot,  both  of  whom  shared  his  views 
as  to  slavery,  and  with  Lamartine  and  Mignet,  get-u 
ting  an  intimate  knowledge  of  French  leaders  of 
thought  and  of  European  politics,  soon  to  be  of 
great  service  not  only  to  himself  but  to  his  country. 
He  found  much  recreation  in  visiting  points  of  his 
toric  interest  and  in  attending  the  opera  and  theatre, 
being  greatly  impressed  by  Eistori's  acting. 

After  a  three- weeks'  tour  of  the  provinces,  he 
crossed  to  London,  where  hosts  of  old  friends  over 
whelmed  him.  with  kindness.  He  was  the  guest  of 
Brougham  and  Cobden,  and  also  of  Gladstone  and 
Bright,  whom  he  now  came  to  know  for  the  first 
time. 


222  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

En  route  to  the  Continent,  lie  spent  four  delight 
ful  days  with  De  Tocqueville,  at  his  chateau,  three 
or  four  centuries  old,  on  the  Island  of  Jersey.  In 
Paris  he  enjoyed  meeting  his  friends,  Hamilton  Fish 
and  family,  just  arrived  from  New  York.  The  next 
month  was  devoted  to  a  hasty  excursion,  in  the 
course  of  which  he  visited  the  points  of  most  ar 
chaeological  and  literary  interest  in  Switzerland, 
Northern  Italy,  Holland  and  Belgium.  In  Septem 
ber  he  returned  to  London,  and  presently  started 
northward  upon  a  tour  which  took  him  as  a  welcome 
guest  to  many  a  famous  castle  and  country  house. 
On  his  return  from  Scotland,  he  was  for  a  day  the 
guest  of  John  Bright,  and  visited  Gladstone.  On 
the  day  of  his  sailing  for  America  (against  the  ad 
vice  of  physicians  and  friends  who  insisted  upon  "  a 
longer  '  fallow '  for  my  brain  ")  he  wrote  intimately 
to  Cobden : — "  I  leave  England  profoundly  impressed 
by  its  civilization,  and  at  the  same  time  painfully 
regretting  three  things, — primogeniture,  the  flun- 
keyism  of  servants,  and  the  tolls, — all  three  showing 
themselves  everywhere." 

At  the  pier  Sumner  was  greeted  by  Wilson,  Banks, 
and  other  friends  and  at  his  home  he  found  the 
street  thronged  with  hundreds  who  had  gathered  to 
bid  him  welcome.  A  few  weeks  later  he  was  cor 
dially  greeted  by  Eepublican  colleagues  at  the  open 
ing  of  the  Thirty-fifth  Congress,  but  administration 
men  kept  aloof.  The  Kansas  debate  was  to  occupy 
much  of  the  time  of  the  session,  the  question  being 
over  the  admission  of  Kansas  upon  the  Lecompton 


IN  QUEST  OF  HEALTH  223 

Constitution,  a  pro-slavery  project  which  Douglas 
was  now  prepared  to  oppose.  Sumncr  had  come 
home  because  his  conscience  would  not  let  him  stay 
away  from  the  field  where  such  fierce  fighting  was 
to  be  done.  But  he  soon  found  that  while  his  months 
of  travel  had  brought  him  interesting  diversion, 
they  had  by  no  means  restored  him  to  health.  A 
few  days  after  the  opening  of  the  session  he  wrote  : 
' '  At  times  I  feel  almost  well,  and  then  after  a  little 
writing  or  a  little  sitting  in  the  Senate,  I  feel  the 
weight  spreading  over  my  brain."  He  was  obliged 
to  give  up  regular  attendance,  not  being  able  to 
listen  even  to  Douglas's  speech.  He  passed  his  time 
in  quiet  reading,  browsing  much  in  the  Smithso 
nian  Institution.  His  enforced  inaction  was  a  sore 
trial  to  him.  To  Dr.  Howe  he  wrote :  "I  would 
give  one  year  of  life  for  one  week  now  to  expose 
this  enormous  villainy"  (the  Lecompton  Constitu 
tion).  But  since  attempts  at  regular  attendance  in 
the  Senate  were  delaying  his  recovery,  he  left  Wash 
ington  in  late  December,  and  for  five  months  came 
to  the  Senate  only  when  summoned  to  vote  upon 
some  matter  of  critical  importance,  usually  in  rela 
tion  to  Kansas.  Much  of  this  time  he  spent  in  Phil 
adelphia,  and  also  at  his  Boston  home  or  with  Long 
fellow.  It  was  in  these  months  of  semi-invalid  ism 
that  he  developed  a  keen  interest  in  old  documents 
and  engravings,  devoting  to  their  tireless  study 
many  days  which  would  otherwise  have  hung  heavily 
on  his  hands.  But  in  April  there  came  a  warning 
that  not  only  was  his  health  far  from  restored  but 


224  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

that  he  must  get  away  from  all  cares  and  responsi 
bilities.  He  suffered  a  severe  prostration,  brought 
on  by  no  undue  exertion  ;  for  weeks  he  could  neither 
walk  nor  rise  from  his  chair  without  great  pain. 
His  best  friends  in  the  Senate  as  well  as  his  medical 
advisers  urged  him  to  go  to  Europe  once  more,  and 
reluctantly  he  started,  May  22d — the  second  anni 
versary  of  the  assault — upon  what  he  planned  should 
be  a  leisurely  tour  of  lands  which  he  had  not  yet 
visited.  Before  sailing  he  published  a  letter  to  the 
people  of  Massachusetts,  explaining  that  he  was 
leaving  the  Senate  solely  for  the  purpose  of  fitting 
himself  for  better  service,  and  that  he  should  have 
resigned,  had  he  not  supposed  his  illness  would  have 
been  more  speedily  cured.  On  the  day  of  his  laud 
ing  at  Havre  he  wrote  in  bitterness  of  spirit :  "  I 
long  for  work,  and  especially  to  make  myself  felt  in 
our  cause.  The  ghost  of  two  years  already  dead 
haunts  me. ' ' 

Sumner  had  hardly  reached  Paris  when  he  was 
recommended  to  consult  Dr.  Brown-S6quard,  who, 
while  not  in  regular  medical  practice,  had  be 
come  quite  famous  for  his  bold  experimenting  on 
animals  and  men,  and  for  his  special  studies  of  nerv 
ous  diseases.  Both  he  and  a  Boston  physician 
then  in  Paris,  in  whom  Sumner  had  great  confi 
dence,  agreed  in  the  opinion  that  Summer's  case 
required  not  merely  time  and  relaxation  but  *  'active 
treatment."  Dr.  Brown -Se"qua^d's theory  was  that 
the  blows  upon  Stunner's  head  had  produced  dis 
turbances  of  the  spinal  cord  in  which  now  lay  the 


IN  QUEST  OF  HEALTH  225 

root  of  difficulty.  The  remedy  which  he  advised 
was  "Fire," — aiid  Sumner  asked  that  it  be  applied 
immediately.  It  was  usual,  during  this  process,  for 
the  patient  to  take  chloroform,  but  when  Sumner 
was  told  that  the  remedy  might  prove  somewhat 
more  effective  without  the  amesthetic,  he  refused  to 
have  it.  At  the  time,  Dr.  Browu-Sequard  gave  the 
following  account  of  the  treatment  :  "I  have  ap 
plied  six  moxas  to  Senator  Sumuer's  neck  and  back, 
and  he  has  borne  these  exceedingly  painful  ap 
plications  with  the  greatest  courage  and  patience. 
A  moxa  is  a  burning  of  the  skin  with  inflamed  agaric 
(amadou),  cottonwood,  or  some  other  very  combusti 
ble  substance.  I  have  never  seen  a  man  bearing  with 
such  fortitude  as  Mr.  Suinuer  has  shown  the  extremely 
violent  pain  of  this  kind  of  burning.'7  The  appli 
cations  lasted  from  five  to  ten  minutes.  Sumner  sat 
gripping  the  top  of  a  chair  which  he  broke  as  he 
writhed  in  agony.  Nor  did  the  torture  end  with  the 
burning,  for  wounds  were  caused  which  refused  to 
heal,  and  which  deprived  him  of  sleep  and  made 
both  driving  and  walking  exceedingly  painful. 
He  wrote  to  Longfellow  :  ' '  The  torment  is  great, 
.  .  .  and  then  the  succession  of  blisters,  inflam 
mations  and  smarts.  I  struggle  for  health,  and  do 
everything  simply  to  that  end.  The  doctor  is  clear 
that  without  this  cruel  treatment  I  should  have  been 
a  permanent  invalid,  always  subject  to  a  sudden  and 
serious  relapse.  Surely  this  life  is  sometimes  held 
on  hard  conditions."  This  mode  of  treatment  then 
met  with  approval  from  many  men  of  distinction  in 


226  CHARLES  SUMNEB 

the  medical  profession,  though  now  entirely  dis 
carded.  In  his  later  practice,  Dr.  Brown-Sequard 
himself  discontinued  it,  regarding  the  pain  which 
he  had  seen  Sunnier  suffer  as  too  great  for  the 
human  system  to  endure.1 

It  was  while  he  was  under  Dr.  Brown-Sequard' s 
ministrations  that  Sumner  experienced  his  first  at 
tack  of  angina  pectoris,  the  painful  disease  which 
was  to  cause  his  death.  The  attack  was  very  severe, 
and  the  pains  recurred  with  such  intensity  as  to 
1 1  make  the  fire  seem  pleasant. ' '  For  two  months  he 
was  hardly  able  to  leave  his  bed.  His  sufferings  were 
intense,  but  his  loneliness  was  somewhat  relieved 
by  scores  of  letters  and  messages  of  sympathy  from 
friends  in  America  and  England.  His  greatest  com 
fort,  when  he  could  leave  his  bed,  was  in  the  exami 
nation  of  the  rich  collections  of  engravings  in  the 
National  Library. 

In  September  Sumner  spent  several  weeks  in  Aix 
en  Savoie,  trying  its  celebrated  baths,  with  no 
marked  results.  But  at  the  end  of  this  treatment, 
he  was  able  to  travel  by  slow  degrees  through  Swit 
zerland  and  northern  Italy,  and  to  visit  Vienna, 
Prague  and  Berlin,  where  he  met  Alexander  von 
Humboldt.  In  November  he  reached  Paris.  Con 
siderable  gain  was  noted  from  these  months  of  travel, 
and  it  was  decided  that  he  should  spend  the  winter 
in  the  south  of  France,  u  with  poisons  for  medicine" 
and  dry  cupping  along  the  spine,  which  Sumner  de 
scribed  as  painful,  but  preferable  to  fire.  Accord- 
fierce,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  563-565. 


IN  QUEST  OF  HEALTH  227 

ingly,  late  in  November,  Sumner  went  to  Montpel- 
lier.  Here  he  u  began  the  day  with  his  torments, 
and  fed  on  his  poisons. "  But  fortunately  other 
curative  agencies  were  at  hand.  The  quiet  little 
city  of  50, 000  had  an  excellent  gallery  and  a  vener 
able  university,  and  in  the  collections  of  paintings, 
engravings,  manuscripts  and  rare  books  there 
were  abundant  interests  to  stimulate  him.  Warm 
friends,  too,  he  made  in  the  families  of  a  distinguished 
naturalist  and  of  a  retired  English  soldier,  one  of 
Wellington's  veterans.  Sumuer  was  most  cordially 
received  at  the  university,  where  he  attended  courses 
of  lectures  on  historical  and  literary  topics.  The 
quiet  walks,  the  " perpetual  spring,"  the  genial  so 
ciety  and  the  refuge  and  solace  which  he  found  in 
books  brought  healing.  But  he  could  not  banish 
from  his  mind  the  doubt  whether  he  ought  not  to 
resign  from  the  Senate.  From  colleagues  and  from 
Massachusetts  advisers  he  received  urgent  charges 
not  to  consider  such  a  step.  And,  as  he  wrote  to 
Charles  Francis  Adams,  "I  could  not  abandon  a 
position  dearer  to  me  now  than  ever,  because  more 
than  ever,  with  returning  health,  I  can  hope  to  serve 
our  cause  ;  and  because  I  have  at  heart  to  be  heard 
again  from  the  seat  where  my  assassination  was  at 
tempted." 

Sumuer  left  Montpellier  early  in  March,  and 
traveled  with  many  stops  through  southern  France 
and  northern  Italy.  These  wanderings  he  described 
with  enthusiasm,  but  added  :  u  Nothing  touches  me 
like  Home."  Here  he  spent  several  weeks,  the 


228  CHARLES  SUMNER 

guest  of  the  Storys.  Though,  but  just  recovering 
from  long  illness,  his  enthusiasm  kept  him  con 
stantly  on  the  move  from  one  object  of  interest  to 
another.  He  found  especial  delight  in  the  studios 
of  painters  and  sculptors,  in  particular  discussing 
with  Rogers  the  persons  and  scenes  to  be  commemo 
rated  upon  the  bronze  doors  for  the  Capitol  at 
Washington,  which  were  then  being  modeled.  The 
unfinished  work  in  Crawford's  studio  filled  him  with 
sorrow.  Motley  and  Hawthorne  were  among  the 
friends  with  whom  he  passed  many  a  delightful 
hour.  But  he  was  ever  beset  by  the  call  of  duty. 
To  Story  he  kept  saying  :  "  I  must  get  well ;  I  will 
get  well !  My  post  is  in  the  Senate,  and  there  I  long 
to  be.  ...  It  is  terrible  to  be  thus  stricken 
down  when  there  is  so  much  to  do." 

Sumner  left  Italy  shortly  before  the  battle  of 
Magenta.  He  felt  it  to  be  "  a  great  moment  in  his 
tory, —nothing  like  it  since  1815."  At  Turin  he 
had  an  informal  interview  with  the  foremost  states 
man  of  the  age,  Cavour.  He  found  him  confident 
that  the  Austriaus  would  be  driven  out  of  Italy 
that  summer,  and  full  of  hope  that  Italy  would  take 
the  place  that  belonged  to  her,  and  that  when  free 
she  might  again  produce  great  men.  Here,  too,  he 
found  all  the  grandes  dames  u  engaged  in  making 
lint  for  the  hospitals,  and  most  happy  that  the 
crisis,  long  desired,  had  at  length  come."  On  his 
way  in  an  open  carriage  across  the  Alps  Sumner 
seemed  to  be  traveling  in  a  pageant,  for  he  was 
constantly  passing  through  files  of  French  troops, 


IN  QUEST  OF  HEALTH  229 

entering  Italy.  He  yielded  to  the  current  belief 
that  Napoleon  III.  would  hold  himself  faithful  to 
the  idea  of  Italian  independence,  but  his  misgivings 
because  of  the  "  strength  of  that  prodigious  tri 
angle"  and  of  his  distrust  of  the  Emperor  proved 
well  grounded.  On  his  return  to  Paris  Sumner 
was  encouraged  to  note  how  much  he  had  gained  in 
strength  since  the  days  when  he  underwent  torture 
in  the  same  lodgings.  He  met  here  Motley  and 
Theodore  Parker,  and  renewed  acquaintance  with 
French  friends  of  former  years.  He  spent  a  few 
weeks  in  London,  but  the  round  of  social  pleasures 
and  the  interest  of  parliamentary  sessions  proved  too 
severe  a  tax  upon  his  strength.  He  was  in  Paris 
again  in  time  to  witness  the  Emperor's  triumphal 
return  from  Italy. 

Both  in  Paris  and  in  London  he  found  delight  in 
indulging  in  his  newly  awakened  passion  for  collect 
ing.  He  wrote  to  Parker:  "For  several  days  I 
have  been  torn  and  devoured  by  desires  that  have 
grown  by  what  they  fed  on, — at  shops  on  the  quays 
and  collections  of  engravings.  I  have  yielded,  till 
I  stand  aghast  at  my  extravagance  !  "  z  His  greatest 

*It  has  been  estimated  that  he  devoted  about  $2,800  upon 
this  trip  to  the  purchase  of  books,  manuscripts,  engravings  and 
works  of  art, — no  small  sum  for  a  man  in  his  position.  He 
was  not  a  good  judge  of  values,  nor  had  he  any  liKing  or  apti 
tude  for  bargaining.  The  result  was  that  he  always  paid  high 
prices  and  often  for  articles  not  of  great  value.  By  the  terms 
of  his  will  his  marbles  went  to  his  sister;  his  bronzes  were 
divided  between  Longfellow  and  Howe;  his  paintings  and  en 
gravings  went  to  the  Boston  Art  Museum;  and  his  books, 
autographs  and  old  manuscripts  to  the  Library  of  Harvard 
College. 


230  CHAELES  SUMNER 

pleasure  was  in  his  engravings.  But  a  sight  which 
he  declared  filled  him  with  even  keener  delight  than 
these  was  that  of  "some  twenty  colored  boys, — some 
mulattoes,  and  others  black  as  Ham, — seated 
among  the  pupils  at  the  College  of  Havre.  Several 
of  these,  including  one  of  the  blackest,  were  among 
those  who  received  prizes." 

A  few  lines  from  a  letter  to  a  friend  written  on 
the  day  Sumner  sailed  for  America  will  give  an  idea 
of  some  of  his  engagements  during  his  last  days  in 
England  :  ' l  Seven  days  in  London  at  the  British 
Museum  ;  a  day  with  the  poet-laureate,  Tennyson,  at 
the  Isle  of  Wight ;  two  days  with  Lord  Stanhope  at 
Chevening  Park,  where  I  slept  in  the  room  which 
was  occupied  for  three  years  by  Lord  Chatham  ;  one 
day  at  Argyll  Lodge  with  the  Duke,  where  I  met 
Gladstone :  .  .  .  one  day  with  Motley,  the 
historian  of  the  Dutch  commonwealth,  at  Walton 
on  Thames." 

November  21,  1859,  Surnner  reached  Boston,  and 
was  most  warmly  greeted  not  only  by  personal 
friends  but  in  public  meetings  and  by  the  legisla 
ture.  During  these  three  years  and  a  half  of  his 
disability,  Massachusetts  had  remained  loyal  to  him. 
There  was  no  wish  for  his  resignation,  for  it  was 
felt  that  the  state  could  be  better  served  by  no  one 
else,  and  that  his  seat  in  the  Senate  chamber,  vacant 
year  after  year,  was  bearing  eloquent  witness  to  the 
great  cause  of  which  Charles  Sumner  was  one  of  the 
first  martyrs. 


CHAPTER  XII 
"THE  BARBARISM  OF  SLAVERY" 

SUMNER  found  the  Senate  not  a  little  changed 
since  the  day  when  he  first  entered  it.  Then  he 
had  been  one  of  but  three  Free  Boilers :  now  there 
were  already  twenty- four  Republicans  to  forty-four 
of  all  other  parties,  and  the  admission  of  Oregon 
and  Minnesota  had  given  promise  that  the  control 
of  the  Senate  by  the  South  was  uearing  its  end. 
Sumner  was  warmly  welcomed  by  the  Republican 
members,  but  met  with  only  formal  recognition 
from  men  on  the  other  side  of  the  chamber.  An 
indication  of  change,  however,  was  his  assignment 
to  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  Here  his 
only  Republican  colleague  was  Seward,  the  others 
being  Crittenden,  Douglas,  Polk  and  Slidell,  with 
the  last  three  of  whom  Suniuer  had  no  personal  in 
tercourse.  Indeed,  he  found  that  in  the  years  of  his 
absence  from  Washington,  the  sectional  line  had 
come  to  be  drawn  with  much  greater  severity  in 
social  relations,  so  that  for  the  most  part  representa 
tives  of  the  two  sections  met  only  as  their  official 
duties  required. 

These  years  had  seen  long  steps  taken  toward  the 
great  crisis  which  in  some  form  was  felt  to  be  im 
minent  :  in  the  Dred  Scott  case  the  Supreme  Court 


232  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

had  set  the  seal  of  its  approval  upon  the  repeal  of 
the  Missouri  Compromise  j  free-state  ineii  in  Kansas 
had  secured  control  of  the  territorial  legislature  and 
had  rejected  admission  to  the  Union  on  the  Lecomp- 
ton  Constitution ;  Douglas  had  effectively  divided 
the  Democratic  party,  first  by  forcing  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  issue,  and  secondly  by  consistently  op 
posing  the  thrusting  of  a  pro-slavery  constitution 
upon  Kansas,  against  her  will.  Douglas  was  now 
fresh  from  the  great  debate-campaign  in  Illinois, 
from  which  he  had  wrested  a  reelection  to  the 
Senate,  but  at  the  cost  of  admissions  and  conces 
sions  that  were  to  blast  his  hopes  for  the  presidency. 
The  Southern  leaders,  seeing  the  North  outstripping 
them,  had  been  planning  for  the  acquisition  of  Cuba 
to  restore  the  balance ;  since  that  project  failed, 
their  old  threats  of  disunion  took  on  new  force  and 
definiteness. 

Following  the  advice  of  physicians  and  friends, 
Sumner  declined  urgent  invitations  to  address  public 
gatherings  and  kept  out  of  the  Senate  debates.  The 
one  absorbing  topic  of  discussion  soon  became  the 
choice  of  presidential  candidates.  Congress  was 
still  in  session  when  the  Democratic  national  con 
vention  met  at  Charleston  and  ended  in  disrup 
tion  over  Douglas's  candidacy,  and  when  the  Ee- 
publicans  in  Chicago  passed  over  Seward  and  Chase 
to  nominate  the  less-known  Lincoln,  with  his  better 
chance  of  carrying  the  doubtful  states  of  the  West.1 

'On  the  first  ballot,  one  delegate— from  Kentucky — voted 
for  Sumner. 


"THE  BARBARISM  OF  SLAVERY"      233 

Sumner,  as  usual,  had  been  slow  to  commit  himself 
or  to  give  advice  as  to  the  selection  of  the  standard- 
bearer,  only  insisting  that  no  one  ought  to  be  chosen 
who  was  not  u  emphatically,  heart  and  soul,  life 
and  conversation,  a  representative  man,  .  .  . 
an  old  and  constant  servant  of  the  cause." 

While  these  decisive  choices  were  being  made, 
Southern  leaders  in  Congress  were  taking  more^d- 
vanced  ground  as  to  slavery  than  ever  before.  Not 
only  did  they  now  assert  that  the  institution  W9B  ft 
positive  good,  beneficial  to  the  black  and  ennobling 
to  the  white,  but  they  sought  by  threat  of  secession 
to  exact  from  Congress  the  most  definite  guarantees. 
Thus,  Jefferson  Davis' s  resolutions,  affirming  the 
sanctity  of  slave  property  in  the  territories,  were 
passed  by  a  vote  of  two  to  one. 

It  was  under  these  circumstances  that  Sumner  de 
termined  to  attempt  in  the  Senate  an  attack  upon 
slavery  such  as  had  never  been  ventured  in  Congress. 
For  months  he  had  been  marshaling  his  material 
for  this  speech,  to  which  he  had  given  the  title, 
"  The  Barbarism  of  Slavery."  The  bill  for  the  ad 
mission  of  Kansas  as  a  free  state  was  pending.  As 
this  would  entitle  Kansas  to  six  votes  in  the  coming 
election,  there  was  not  the  slightest  possibility  that 
the  Democratic  majority  would  allow  the  bill  to 
pass  at  this  session,  but  the  debate  upon  it  gave  op 
portunity  for  a  number  of  senators  to  express  their 
views.  Sumner  took  the  floor  on  the  morning  of 
Monday,  June  4th.  Not  yet  certain  of  his  strength, 
he  had  bis  speech  in  type.  It  was  the  first  time 


234  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

since  the  assault,  more  than  four  years  before,  that 
he  had  thus  formally  addressed  the  Senate. 

At  the  outset  he  disclaimed  having  any  personal 
griefs  to  utter  or  personal  wrongs  to  avenge,  adding, 
'  4  The  years  which  have  intervened  and  the  tombs 
that  have  opened  since  I  spoke,  have  their  voices, 
too,  which  I  cannot  fail  to  hear."  He  then  declared 
his  intent  to  lay  bare  the  true  character  of  slavery 
in  its  social,  moral  and  economic  as  well  as  political 
aspects.  He  proceeded  to  set  forth  its  barbarism, 
in  degrading  a  human  being  into  a  chattel,  in  its 
pernicious  effects  upon  marriage  and  the  relations 
between  parent  and  child,  in  shutting  to  the  slave 
the  door  of  moral  and  intellectual  life,  and  in  its 
exploitation  of  the  slave's  labor.  These,  he  showed, 
were  all  features  essential  to  slavery,  here  lacking 
many  of  the  alleviations  that  hatl  gathered  about 
other  forms  of  servitude.  He  next  presented,  with 
a  convincing  particularity  of  statistical  detail,  the 
practical  effects  which  slavery  had  had  upon  the 
Southern  states  in  their  slow  growth  in  population 
and  in  wealth,  in  their  dearth  of  inventions  and  in 
ternal  improvements,  in  their  scanty  development 


in  education,  Qtc.  ^  A  humiliating  exhibition  was 
made  of  the  brutalizing  effects  upon  the  masters. 
He  insisted,  as  he  had  repeatedly  done  before,  that 
the  Constitution  afforded  no  recognition  of  property 
in  a  human  being,  and  held  up  to  ridicule  Douglas's 
u  popular  sovereignty"  dogma  as  a  "device  of 
politicians." 
The  speech  lasted  four  hours  and  over.  There 


"THE  BARBARISM  OF  SLAVERY"      235 

was  no  attempt  at  interruption,  but  -many  of  the 
Southern  senators,  as  if  by  prearrangemeut,  snowed 
contemptuous  indifference,  walking  about  the  cham 
ber  and  engaging  in  boisterous  conversation,  appar 
ently  with  a  childish  intention  of  annoying  the 
speaker.  At  its  close,  Chestnut  of  South  Carolina 
put  himself  forward  as  the  spokesman  of  the  South 
ern  members:  "  After  ranging  over  Europe,  crawl 
ing  through  the  back-door  to  whine  at  the  feet  of 
British  aristocracy,  craving  pity,  and  reaping  a  rich 
harvest  of  contempt,  the  slanderer  of  states  and  men 
reappears  in  the  Senate.  ...  It  has  been  left 
for  this  day,  for  this  country,  for  the  Abolitionists 
of  Massachusetts,  to  deify  the  incarnation  of  malice, 
mendacity  and  cowardice.  .  .  .  We  are  not  in 
clined  again  to  send  forth  the  recipient  of  punish 
ment  howling  through  the  world,  yelping  fresh  cries 
of  slander  and  malice."  l  Sumuer's  only  rejoinder 
was  that  he  should  print  Chestnut's  reply  as  another 
illustration  of  the  barbarism  to  which  he  had  just 
been  alluding. 

This  was  the  last  speech  of  any  moment  on  slavery 
delivered  in  Congress  and,  with  "  The  Crime  against 
Kansas,"  stands  to-day  as  comprising  the  most  thor 
ough  setting  forth  of  the  indictment  against  Ameri 
can  slavery  ever  made.  Several  of  Suniner's  friends 
insisted  on  escorting  him  to  his  lodgings,  and  for 

1  He  condensed  into  two  minutes,  says  Von  Hoist,  "so  enor 
mous  an   amount  of   brutal  and  venomous  vulgarity     . 
that  the  annals  of  Congress,  rich  as  they  are  in  such  material, 
have   nothing  to   match    them." — Constitutional  History  of  the 
United  States,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  208. 


236  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

some  time  thereafter,  quite  to  his  annoyance,  they 
kept  guard  over  his  apartment  at  night. 

Among  most  of  Sumner' s  Eepublican  colleagues 
and  friends  there  was  grave  doubt  as  to  the  wisdom 
and  timeliness  of  this  u  assault  on  American  slavery 
all  along  the  line."  It  was  on  the  eve  of  a  presi 
dential  election,  and  many  feared  that  voters  who 
were  not  of  pronounced  anti-slavery  principles  would 
be  repelled  by  having  this  issue  thrust  into  such  of 
fensive  prominence.  But  Sumner  never  could  be 
brought  to  govern  his  actions  according  to  the  party 
expediency  of  the  moment.  To  him,  the  slavery 
issue  was  the  all-dominating  moral  question  of  the 
age,  to  be  incessantly  forced  upon  public  attention 
until  it  should  be  settled  aright.  And,  in  fact,  it 
may  be  doubted  whether  now,  as  on  earlier  similar 
occasions,  Sumner  did  not  prove  the  more  far-sighted 
politician.  His  address  was  printed  entire,  in 
enormous  editions  in  all  the  leading  newspapers, 
and  pamphlet  editions  of  it  were  spread  broadcast 
by  the  National  Eepublican  Committee.  Hundreds 
of  private  letters  as  well  as  general  comment  in  Ee 
publican  journals  approved  the  steadfast,  uncom 
promising  tone  of  the  speech,  and  in  the  campaign 
of  the  next  few  months  it  was  found  that  this  was 
the  note  which  called  out  the  most  responsive  en 
thusiasm.  Soon  after  the  end  of  the  session,  at  the 
invitation  of  the  Young  Men's  Eepublican  Union, 
Sumuer  addressed  an  audience  of  three  thousand  in 
the  Cooper  Institute  upon  "  The  Origin,  Necessity 
and  Permanence  of  the  Eepublican  Party."  It  was 


"THE  BARBARISM  OF  SLA  VERY ':      237 

a  brilliant  triumph.  The  speaker's  voice  and 
strength  seemed  fully  restored  and  from  the  begin 
ning  to  the  end  he  held  his  hearers  in  complete  sway. 
At  the  Eepublican  state  convention  in  Worcester, 
for  the  first  time  in  six  years  he  appeared  before  his 
own  constituency,  and  aroused  the  delegates  by  his 
denunciation  of  the  Douglas  "  popular  sovereignty 
dodge,"  and  by  his  expressions  of  cordial  confidence 
in  Lincoln.  The  night  before  the  election,  he  pre 
sided  at  a  great  Republican  gathering  in  Faneuil 
Hall,  and  thrilled  his  hearers  by  the  prediction  that 
Republican  victory  on  the  morrow  would  make 
"not  only  a  new  President,  but  a  new  govern 
ment." 

Sumner  yielded  to  none  of  the  urgent  demands 
for  his  services  as  a  campaign  speaker  outside  of 
his  own  state,  trusting  to  the  wide  circulation  of  his 
two  recent  speeches  to  spread  his  views.  In  the 
autumn,  he  prepared,  for  the  Lyceum  platform,  an 
eloquent  address  on  Lafayette.  He  had  recently 
visited  scenes  associated  with  the  French  patriot 
and  was  fitted  both  by  information  and  tempera 
ment  to  give  an  appreciative  tribute  to  the  man. 
But,  in  accordance  with  his  frequent  practice,  he 
made  his  subject  almost  secondary  to  the  political 
issue  of  the  hour,  for  the  points  which  he  thrust  into 
greatest  prominence  were  Lafayette's  "constant 
testimony  against  American  slavery"  and  his  life 
long  devotion  to  liberty.  This  address  was  delivered 
four  times  in  cities  of  New  England,  and  in  New 
York  and  Philadelphia,  and  many  a  man  to-day  re- 


238  CHABLES  SUMNEK 

calls  the  thrill  with  which,  as  a  youth,  he  listened  to 
that  inspiring  oration. 

American  history  has  known  no  more  critical 
period  than  the  months  between  the  November  elec 
tion  and  Lincoln's  inauguration.  These  three 
months  of  an  outgoing  administration, — always  a 
season  of  weakness,  especially  when  a  change  of 
party  is  impending, — were  then  filled  with  the 
gravest  uncertainties.  Many  courses  seemed  pos 
sible,  yet  choices  apparently  trifling  might  involve 
the  fate  of  the  nation. 

Southern  leaders  had  been  making  their  plans  far 
ahead,  and  had  determined  upon  their  course  in  the 
not  improbable  event  of  Lincoln's  election.  But 
Northern  men  were  now  surprised  and  aghast  to 
find  that  disunion,  so  long  threatened,  was  rapidly 
being  carried  into  eifect.  Straightway  there  came 
forward  in  the  North  men  who  justified  secession  as 
a  constitutional  right.  A  feeling  of  panic  at  the 
thought  of  the  break-up  of  the  Union  quickly  spread, 
and  every  sacrifice  seemed  necessary  in  order  to 
avoid  that  catastrophe.  In  Boston,  as  in  other  large 
cities,  this  feeling  showed  itself  immediately  in  an 
tagonism  to  open  discussion  of  anti-slavery  meas 
ures.  Mobs  broke  up  anti-slavery  meetings,  and 
the  Boston  Courier  said  in  a  leader:  "  Nor  do  we 
believe  that  our  people  will  listen  hereafter  to  the 
fierce  tirades  of  Phillips  and  his  crew,  to  the  empty 
platitudes  of  Sumner,  or  the  insolent  bravado  of 
Wilson."  l 

1  December  4,  1860. 


"THE  BAKBAKISM  OF  SLAVERY'       239 

Meantime  Buchanan  was  waiting  upon  events,— 
events  which  Southern  members  of  his  cabinet 
were  shaping  to  the  advantage  of  the  South.  In  the 
midst  of  all  this  uncertainty,  men  of  undoubted 
patriotism  sought  anxiously  for  the  course  which 
would  ward  off  impending  civil  war.  At  the  dis 
tance  of  half  a  century  the  student  of  history  must 
seek  to  realize  how  impenetrable  then  was  the  future  ; 
nor  must  he  deny  patriotic  motives  to  many  a  prop 
osition  which,  in  the  clear  light  of  the  after-event, 
seems  doomed  from  the  first  to  prove  futile  if  not 
fatal.  Greeley  was  ready  to  bid  the  slave  states 
"  go  in  peace  "  ;  Phillips  vehemently  asserted  their 
right  to  secede  ;  General  Scott  busied  himself  with 
elaborate  schemes  for  the  peaceful  division  of  the 
United  States  into  four  confederacies  ;  and  many 
influential  men  at  the  North  were  outspoken  in 
favor  of  formal  guarantees  being  given  of  the  rights 
of  slave-owners  to  take  their  slaves  into  the  terri 
tories  and  hold  them. 

Congress  had  hardly  met  when  compromise  meas 
ures  began  to  be  proposed,  the  most  favored  scheme 
being  that  of  Crittendeu,  which  had  as  its  cardinal 
features  the  prohibition  of  slavery  north  of  36°  30', 
but  its  distinct  recognition  and  protection  by  terri 
torial  governments  south  of  that  line  ;  the  prohibi 
tion  for  all  future  time  of  any  amendment  to  the 
Constitution  giving  Congress  power  to  interfere  with 
slavery  in  the  states  ;  the  disfranchisement  of  free 
negroes  in  all  the  states  ;  and  the  enforcement  of  the 
law  against  the  African  slave-trade.  Seward  de- 


240  CHABLES  SUMNEK 

clared  that  two-thirds  of  the  Eepublican  senators 
were  "  as  reckless  in  action  as  the  South/'  and  inti 
mated  that  he  felt  himself  commissioned  to  be  the 
reconciler.  In  January,  at  the  end  of  an  elaborate 
speech,  he  presented  his  remedies  :  the  organization 
of  territories  and  the  admission  of  states  without 
conditions  as  to  slavery  j  an  irrevocable  constitu 
tional  amendment  prohibiting  interference  by  Con 
gress  with  slavery  in  the  states  ;  and  a  convention  to 
revise  the  Constitution.  Even  Charles  Francis 
Adams,  hitherto  one  of  the  most  loyal  of  the  Free 
Soil  men,  now  showed  hesitancy  and  an  inclination 
to  accept  Se ward's  proposals. 

In  the  midst  of  all  this  uncertainty  and  com 
promise,  no  man  evidenced  a  clearer  vision  of  the 
future  or  a  more  steadfast  purpose  in  the  present 
than  did  Sumner.  To  Howe  he  wrote  on  January 
17th :  "I  trust  that  Massachusetts  continues  UD- 
seduced  by  any  proposal  of  compromise  or  conces 
sion,  in  whatever  form  or  name.  My  best  energies 
have  been  devoted  to  keep  our  men  firm,  firm, 
FIRM."  A  few  days  in  advance  of  its  delivery, 
Seward  read  his  speech  to  Sumner,  who  "  pro 
tested  with  his  whole  soul"  against  its  compromise 
proposals.  Beset  by  a  member  of  the  House  with 
the  question  what  " concession"  he  was  ready  to 
make,  Sunnier  replied:  "There  is  one:  I  will 
consent  to  be  silent  yet  a  little  longer."  '  From 

'Sumner  and  the  other  radicals,  both  in  the  Senate  and  in  the 
House,  also  sat  silent  and  offered  no  word  of  protest  to  the  pas 
sage  at  this  session  of  the  bill  for  the  organization  of  the  terri- 


"THE  BARBARISM  OF  SLAVERY1'      241 

time  to  time,  in  the  course  of  the  debates,  he  made 
his  attitude  plain,  but  he  held  himself  back  from 
speaking  his  full  mind  because  he  frit  that  he 
"could  say  nothing  which  would  not  be  perverted 
by  compromisers  as  an  attempt  to  v  iden  tfre 
breach.'7  He  alone  of  the  Massachusetts  delega 
tion  in  Congress  opposed  the  state's  being  repre 
sented  in  the  peace  conference  which  met  at  Wash 
ington  in  February  and  endorsed  compromise 
measures  similar  to  those  of  Critteudeu.  Simmer 
early  came  to  believe  that  war  was  inevitable,  and 
that  its  issue  was  to  be  decided  only  after  a  long 
and  bitter  contest.  Yet  he  never  doubted  that  the 
Union  would  triumph,  his  confidence  being  based 
upon  his  belief  "in  a  world  governed  by  moral 
law."  To  Whittier  he  wrote:  "People  are 
anxious  to  save  our  forts,  to  save  the  national  cap 
ital  ;  but  I  am  more  anxious  to  save  our  principles, 
which  leaders  now  propose  to  abandon  as  Mr. 
Buchanan  proposed  to  abandon  Fort  Sumter." 
He  earnestly  besought  Massachusetts  leaders  not  to 

tories  of  Colorado,  Dakota  and  Nevada,  without  any  mention 
of  slavery,  "  thus  giving  the  South  the  benefit  of  the  Dred 
Scott  decision  therein."  Elaine  discusses  this  "extraordinary 
change  of  position  "  at  some  length.  "  Between  the  words  of 
Mr.  Seward  and  Mr.  Sumner  in  the  one  crisis  and  their  votes  in 
the  other,  there  is  a  discrepancy  for  which  it  would  have  been 
well  to  leave  on  record  an  adequate  explanation.  The  danger  to 
the  Union,  in  which  they  found  a  good  reason  for  receding  from 
the  anti-slavery  restriction  on  the  territories,  had  been  cruelly 
denied  to  Mr.  Webster  as  a  justifying  motive.  They  found  in 
him  only  a  guilty  recreancy  to  sacred  principle  for  the  same  act 
which  in  themselves  was  inspired  by  devotion  to  the  Union." 
—  Twenty  Years  of  Congress,  Vol.  I,  pp.  269-272. 


242  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

yield  a  jot  in  the  way  of  modifying  the  personal 
liberty  laws,  and  it  is  thought  that  it  was  his  in 
fluence  by  which  the  legislature  was  persuaded. 
He  believed  that  the  very  inordinateness  of  the 
Southern  demands  would  make  it  next  to  impos 
sible  to  appease  them.  i  i  If  they  asked  less,  we 
should  be  lost." 

While  for  the  most  part  keeping  out  of  the 
debate,  he  did  read  in  the  Senate  with  great  effect  a 
theretofore  unpublished  letter  of  Andrew  Jackson, 
of  May,  1833,  when  the  nullification  controversy 
was  fresh  in  mind,  in  which  this  Southern  Demo 
crat  declared  that  "  the  tariff  was  only  the  pretext, 
and  disunion  the  real  object,"  and  that  u  the  next 
pretext  will  be  the  negro  and  slavery  question."  l 
Again  he  spoke  to  the  point,  when  Massachusetts' 
attitude  was  brought  in  question.  A  "  Union " 
meeting,  held  in  Boston,  had  endorsed  the  Critten- 
den  Compromise,  and  a  committee  came  to  Wash 
ington  to  urge  its  adoption,  as  advocated  by  the 
formal  vote  of  the  Boston  City  Council  and  by  a 
petition  signed  by  23,000  Massachusetts  citizens. 
Everett  and  Lawrence  waited  upon  Sumner  and 
begged  him  to  support  it,  but  found  him  unyield 
ing.2  When  the  petition,  wrapped  in  the  Ameri- 

1  Work*,  Vol.  V,  pp.  433-436. 

2  With  them  came  ua  large  number  of  the  most  conspicuous 
citizens  of  Boston,  all  of  whom   had  been  among  his  strongest 
and   most   positive   political  opponents."     They  expressed   at 
length  their  confidence  in   him  as  the  one  man  who  could  do 
most  to  save  the  country  in  its  present  peril.     "We  implore 
you,  Mr.  Sumner,  as  you  love  your  country  and  your  God,  to 
vote  for  the   Crittendeu   Compromise."     "Sir,"  said  Charles 


"THE  BARBARISM  OF  SLAVERY'       243 

can  flag,  was  presented  by  Crittendeu,  Suinner 
spoke  briefly,  declaring  that  the  propositions  therein 
contained  went  "  beyond  the  Breckiuridge  platform, 
already  solemnly  condemned  by  the  American 
people  in  the  election  of  Abraham  Lincoln,"  and 
asserted  that  the  petitioners  could  have  signed  the 
measure  only  in  ignorance  of  its  real  character. 
This  was  resented  by  the  Boston  City  Council, 
which  declared  the  statement  "undignified,  unbe 
coming  a  senator  and  a  citizen  of  Boston,  and  un 
true  "  ;  yet  Sumner  received  many  letters,  some 
even  from  signers,  who  acknowledged  that  his 
words  were  entirely  just.1 

Of  all  the  Republican  leaders,  Sumner  found 
himself  most  in  accord  with  Chase,  who  started  the 
watchword,  "  Inauguration  first,  adjustment  after 
ward;"  and  he  also  drew  encouragement  from 
Lincoln's  declaration  that  the  Republican  party 
should  not  with  his  assent  become  "  a  mere  sucked 
egg,  all  shell  and  no  meat, — the  principle  all 
sucked  out."  He  was  often  consulted  by  Stanton 
and  the  other  loyal  members  of  the  cabinet  as  to  the 
preliminaries  to  the  inauguration.  In  the  Senate, 
which  met  immediately  after  Lincoln's  taking  the 

Sumner  rising  to  his  lofty  height,  and  never  more  Charles  Sum 
ner  than  at  that  moment,  "  if  what  you  say  is  indeed  true,  and 
if  at  this  moment  the  North  trusts  me,  as  you  think,  beyond 
all  others,  it  is  because  the  North  knows  that  under  no  circum 
stances  whatever  would  I  compromise." — G.  W.  Curtis, 
Orations,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  225-226. 

1  John  M.  Forbes  declared  :  "One  young  rascal  complained 
loudly  that  'he  hadn't  a  chance  to  sign  it  only  fourteen 
times.'  " 


244  CHAELES  SUMNER 

oath  of  office,  the  Republicans  found  themselves  in 
majority,  and  hence  in  control  of  the  committees. 
Nine  years  before,  Bright  of  Indiana — soon  to  be 
expelled  for  treason — had  explained  the  exclusion 
of  Chase,  Hale  and  Sumner  from  the  committee  list 
by  saying  that  they  were  "outside  of  any  healthy 
political  organization."  It  was  noted  as  a  matter 
of  poetic  justice  that  it  now  fell  to  this  same  man  to 
move  the  report  of  the  committee  list  which  had 
been  agreed  upon  by  the  two  parties.  Old  time 
Free  Soilers  now  came  to  their  own.  Sumner  was 
named  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Rela 
tions,  and  a  member  of  the  Committees  on  Private 
Land  Claims  and  on  Patents.  His  chairmanship 
was  a  position  exceedingly  congenial  to  him,  and 
one  in  which  his  thorough  grounding  in  inter 
national  law,  his  unrivaled  knowledge  of  European 
politics  and  acquaintance  with  European  public 
men  placed  him  where  he  could  be  of  incalculable 
service  to  his  country.  For  eight  years  he  was  to 
work  for  the  most  part  harmoniously  with  Seward 
as  Secretary  of  State,  although  from  now  on  they 
had  little  sympathy  with  each  other's  views  upon 
the  most  important  questions  of  domestic  policy. 

Years  in  advance  of  the  time  when  reform  of  the 
civil  service  commanded  public  attention,  Sumner 
attempted,  as  far  as  his  influence  would  permit,  to 
put  its  principles  in  practice.  He  urged  the  reten 
tion  of  faithful  and  competent  oncers  and  the  dis 
regard  of  proportional  distribution  of  offices  where 
it  hindered  efficiency.  So  far  as  the  appoint- 


"THE  BARBAKISM  OF  SLAVERY" 

ments  which  fell  to  Massachusetts  were  concerned, 
Suinuer  took  the  list,  which  had  been  agreed  upon 
by  the  delegation  while  in  Boston,  to  the  President, 
and  urged  that  these  appointments,  while  not  ideal, 
should  be  made  forthwith,  in  order  that  the  whole 
question  might  be  taken  out  of  discussion  when  so 
much  more  vital  matters  needed  attention  ;  and  this 
was  done.  Sumuer's  weakness  in  his  own  selections 
for  office  usually  lay  in  his  overweighting  literary 
ability  as  a  qualification.  Personal  favoritism  could 
never  justly  be  urged  against  his  candidates  ;  service 
in  the  anti-slavery  ranks  counted  for  much  with 
him.  It  was  this  that  led  to  his  naming  Palfrey  for 
postmaster  of  Boston,  and  to  his  earnest  but  unsuc 
cessful  efforts  to  secure  the  appointment  of  Howe  as 
Minister  to  Greece. 

Before  Suinner  started  for  Boston  at  the  end  of 
the  session,  Sumter  had  fallen,  and  Lincoln  had 
issued  his  first  call  for  volunteers.  Upon  his  way 
North,  Sumner  stopped  for  the  night  in  Baltimore, 
but  when  it  became  known  that  he  was  in  the  city, 
a  riotous  mob  gathered.  The  proprietor  of  the 
hotel  where  he  had  taken  a  room,  alarmed  for  his 
property  if  the  anti-slavery  leader  should  be  dis 
covered  under  his  roof,  demanded  that  he  leave  at 
once,  but  Sumner  insisted  upon  the  rights  due  a 
guest,  and  was  accordingly  lodged  for  the  night 
in  concealment.  The  next  morning,  on  his  way  to 
Philadelphia,  Sumner  met  a  train  filled  with  rollick 
ing  soldier  boys  :  it  was  the  Sixth  Eegiment  of 
Massachusetts,  forty  of  whose  members  were  that 


246  CHAKLES  SUMNEB 

very  day  to  be  killed  or  wounded  in  the  streets  of 
Baltimore  by  a  secession  uiob,  such  as  had  hunted 
him  as  its  first  victim  ;  and  after  this,  their  first  day 
of  battle,  these  soldier  boys  were  to  be  quartered 
for  the  night  in  the  Senate  chamber  at  Washington. 
In  New  York  Suiniier  visited  the  armory  where  a 
battalion  of  Massachusetts  Rifles  were  quartered. 
His  words  to  them  were  a  clarion  call  to  battle  for 
"  Massachusetts,  the  Constitution  and  Freedom." 
The  time  had  come  when  even  the  author  of  "  The 
True  Grandeur  of  Nations/'  with  all  his  heart  and 
soul,  could  bid  men  Godspeed  in  such  a  war  ! 


CHAPTER  XIII 

WAR   PROBLEMS  :      THE   TRENT   AFFAIR 

CONGRESS  met  in  special  session  on  the  Fourth  of 
July,  1861.  A  week  before  its  opening,  Sunnier 
wrote  to  Lieber  that  he  had  proposed  to  the  Presi 
dent  and  his  cabinet  a  programme  of  legislation, 
which  should  include  an  army  bill,  a  navy  bill,  a 
bill  for  a  loan  and  war  taxes,  a  bill  for  treason,  and 
a  bill  of  embargo  and  non-intercourse.  He  added 
that  he  hoped  this  would  be  carried  out  "  without  a 
single  speech,  or  one  word  of  buncombe,  so  that  one 
short  session  may  be  a  mighty  act."  It  is  signifi 
cant  both  of  the  consideration  already  shown  Sumuer 
and  of  his  growing  sense  of  his  own  importance,  that 
he  should  have  put  before  the  administration  such  a 
comprehensive  programme. 

In  the  early  months  of  the  war  great  pains  were 
taken  to  disclaim  any  anti-slavery  purpose,  and 
where  officials,  civil  or  military,  had  taken  ac 
tion  which  seemed  to  commit  the  administration 
to  any  such  policy,  it  was  promptly  disavowed. 
The  preservation  of  the  Union  was  the  one  ground 
on  which  Lincoln  wished  to  base  his  con 
duct  of  the  war.  In  diplomatic  as  well  as  in 
domestic  correspondence,  Seward  repeatedly  as 
serted  that  the  status  of  slavery  would  remain  un 
changed,  whatever  the  outcome  of  the  insurrection. 


248  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

I?rom  the  outset,  „  Sumner  and  many  of  the  other 
/radical  anti-slavery  leaders  believed  that  this  policy 
was  a  most  unfortunate  mistake.  They  recognized, 
however,  that,  with  a  view  to  keeping  in  touch  with 
the  border  states  and  with  the  great  mass  of  Eepub- 
licaus  whose  chief  interest  was  not  in  the  anti- 
slavery  movement  but  in  the  preservation  of  the 
Union,  it  was  best  not  to  force  the  issue  prema 
turely.1  But  the  disaster  at  Bull  Eun  brought  a 
great  awakening  ;  George  Sumner  greeted  the  news 
with  jubilation  confident  that  at  last  the  admin 
istration  and  the  public  would  be  aroused  to  the 
magnitude  of  the  task  before  them.2 

As  early  as  May  of  that  year,  Charles  Sunnier 
had  broached  the  subject  of  emancipation  to  the 
President,  and  urged  him  to  be  prepared  to 
strike  when  the  proper  moment  arrived.  He  now 
besought  him  to  come  out  openly  against  slavery. 
;  This  the  President  was  not  ready  to  do,  though  he 
carefully  weighed  Sumner' s  arguments,  particularly 
his  contention  that  the  disavowal  of  any  humanita 
rian  motive  was  making  the  war  seem  one  merely  for 
power,  and  was  greatly  weakening  the  Union  cause 
in  the  eyes  of  European  nations,  whose  sympathy 
we  should  do  nothing  to  estrange. 

1  It  was  doubtless  this  conviction  which  induced  Sumner — and 
Thaddeus  Stevens  and  Owen  Lovejoy,  in  the  House — to  abstain 
from  voting  upon  the  Crittenden  resolution  declaring  that  the 
war  was  not  waged  "  in  any  spirit  of  oppression,  or  for  any  pur 
pose  of  conquest  or  subjugation,  or  the  overthrowing  or  inter 
fering  with  the  rights  or  established  institutions  of  those  states," 
— Blaine,  Twenty  Years  of  Congress.  Vol.  I,  p.  341. 

8  Autobiography  of  Andrew  D,  White,  Vol.  I,  p.  88, 


WAR  PROBLEMS  249 

In  October  Sunnier,  upon  his  own  responsibility, 
took  a  decided  step.  At  the  Massachusetts  state 
Republican  convention  at  Worcester,  lie  made  a 
brief  speech  in  which  he  insisted  that  shivery  was 
the  sole  cause  and  the  main  strength  of  the  rebel 
lion,  and  that  it  should  therefore  be  struck  down  by 
every  power  at  the  government's  command.  Said 
he  :  a  It  is  often  said  that  the  war  will  make  an 
end  of  slavery.  This  is  probable,  but  it  is  surer 
still  that  the  overthrow  of  slavery  will  make  an  end 
of  the  war.  ...  A  simple  declaration  that  all 
men  within  the  lines  of  the  United  States  troops  are 
freemen  will  be  in  strict  conformity  with  the  Con 
stitution  and  also  with  precedent.  The  Constitu 
tion  knows  no  man  as  slave.  .  .  .  There  is  a 
higher  agency  that  may  be  invoked,  which  is  at  the 
same  time  under  the  Constitution  and  above  the  Con 
stitution, — I  mean  martial  law,  in  its  plenitude,  and 
declared  by  solemn  proclamation."  He  cited  John 
Quincy  Adams  as  authority  for  the  power  to  eman 
cipate  slaves  by  martial  law.  While  not  assuming 
to  say  that  the  hour  for  such  action  had  come,  he 
did  declare  that  *  *  there  are  times  when  not  to  act 
carries  with  it  greater  responsibility  than  to  acf." 

In  this  speech  for  the  first  time  an  American 
statesman  openly  and  boldly  advocated  the  policy  of 
emancipation.  His  words  made  a  profound  impres 
sion,  but  an  attempt  to  secure  an  endorsement  of  the 
recommendation  in  the  convention's  resolutions 
showed  that  there  was  much  opposition.  To  veteran 
Free  Soilers  this  call  for  an  end  of  "the  policy  of 


260  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

forbearance"  toward  slavery  was  most  welcome. 
But  to  those  of  more  conservative  temperament  and 
traditions,  it  seemed  incendiary.  Boston  journal*, 
as  usual,  were  especially  denunciatory,  referring  to 
Sunnier' s  "  insane  counsels7'  and  speaking  of  him 
as  a  "candidate  from  an  insane  asylum."  " Pro 
claim  the  policy  of  emancipation,"  said  one,  "and 
all  hope  of  reconstruction  of  the  Union  will  be 
crushed  out."  Eight  years  later,  however,  one  of 
these  Boston  editors,  who  had  ever  been  severely 
critical  of  Sunnier' s  politics,  wrote  :  "I  am  struck 
with  wonder  at  the  clear  comprehension  which  you 
had  of  the  magnitude  of  the  war  at  the  beginning, 
and  of  the  true  and  only  means  by  which  it  could  be 
conducted  to  a  proper  termination.  Your  speech 
reads  to-day  like  a  sacred  prophecy.  For  it  you 
were  assailed  ;  but  it  was  true,  nevertheless,  and  the 
country  came  at  length  to  your  defense  by  adopting 
your  statesmanship. ' '  l 

A  few  weeks  later  great  enthusiasm  was  aroused 
in  Boston,  New  York,  Philadelphia  and  other  cities 
by  an  address  on  "The  Eebellion,  its  Origin  and 
Mainspring,"  in  which  Sumner  elaborated  and  en 
forced  the  points  of  his  Worcester  speech.  With 
tremendous  force  he  denounced  slavery  as  the  sole 
cause  and  support  of  the  war,  and  insisted  that 
emancipation  was  a  military  necessity.  "  In  no 
way  can  we  do  so  much  at  so  little  cost.  To  the 
enemy  such  a  blow  will  be  a  terror  ;  to  good  men  it 

1  William  Schouler,  Feb.  18,  1869.  Quoted  by  Pierce,  Vol. 
IV,  p.  46. 


WAR  PROBLEMS  251 

will  be  an  encouragement ;  and  to  foreign  nations 
watching  this  contest  it  will  be  an  earnest  of  some 
thing  beyond  a  mere  carnival  of  battle/' 

From  this  time  on,  in  season  and  out  of  season,  in 
the  Senate,  in  public  addresses,  in  conference  with 
the  President  and  with  public  men,  Sunnier  never> 
ceased  to  urge  emancipation.  In  the  midst  of  all 
the  wavering  and  uncertainty,  his  steadfast  adher 
ence  to  this  policy,  at  first  deemed  revolutionary, 
but  soon  recognized  as  inevitable,  was  one  of  the 
most  potent  influences  in  preparation  for  that  ulti 
mate  resort. 

In  the  summer  of  1861  the  Northern  arms  seemed 
to  make  no  progress.  There  was  deep  depression  at 
home,  while  abroad  the  belief  was  becoming  fixed 
that  the  Union  was  already  dissolved.  It  was  in 
these  days  of  gloom  that  an  event  took  place  which 
wrought  the  whole  country  to  the  highest  pitch  of 
excitement,  and  bade  fair  to  involve  the  gravest 
consequences.  On  the  8th  of  November,  Captain 
Wilkes  of  the  United  States  naval-ship  San  Jacinto 
boarded  the  British  steamer  Trent  between  Havana 
and  Nassau,  two  neutral  ports,  and  seized  Mason 
and  Slidell,  with  two  secretaries  and  despatches. 
These  men,  who  had  been  duly  accredited  as  envoys 
of  the  Confederate  States  to  England  and  France  re 
spectively,  were  brought  to  the  United  States  and 
placed  in  confinement.  This  exploit  was  hailed 
with  wild  enthusiasm  throughout  the  North.  The 
Secretary  of  the  Navy  declared  that  Captain  Wilkes' s 
act  was  "  marked  by  intelligence,  ability,  decision 


252  CHABLES  SUMNEB 

and  firmness,  and  has  the  emphatic  approval  of  this 
department." 

It  is  asserted  that  at  first  * '  no  man  was  more  elated 
and  j  ubilant  over  the  capture  of  the  emissaries  than 
Mr.  Seward."  l  Indeed,  of  all  the  members  of  the 
cabinet,  Postmaster- General  Blair  was  the  only  one 
who  is  known  to  have  taken  an  opposing  view  at 
the  outset.8  At  the  opening  of  Congress,  the  very 
first  act  of  the  House  of  Representatives  was  by 
unanimous  resolution,  without  even  reference  to  a 
committee,  to  commend  Captain  Wilkes's  "brave, 
adroit,  and  patriotic  conduct."  The  press  and  pub 
lic  men,  with  few  exceptions,  joined  in  the  chorus 
of  jubilation  and  praise.  Sumner  was  still  in  Bos 
ton  when  he  heard  of  the  envoys'  capture.  With 
out  a  moment's  hesitation  he  declared,  u  We  shall 
have  to  give  them  up."  From  that  opinion  he 
never  wavered,  for  he  knew  both  the  law  of  nations 


1  Seward's  most  recent  biographer  does  not  deny  that  this  was 
probably  the  line  of  the  Secretary's  first  opinion  and  impulses. 
He  points  out  that  Seward  was  most  likely  to  regard  political 
results  as  of  prime  consideration.  He  at  this  time  believed 
England  and  France  to  be  on  the  point  of  intervening,  and  was 
putting  forth  his  best  efforts  to  remove  all  causes  of  friction. 
The  Trent  seizure  was  totally  unexpected  and  counter  to  the 
diplomatic  plans  of  the  administration.  "His  habitual  te 
nacity  of  purpose  was  likely  to  hold  him  to  his  policy  of 
avoiding  a  war.  But  there  was  the  popular  applause  of  Wilkes; 
and  it  always  made  Seward  very  unhappy  to  find  that  the  peo 
ple  were  against  him,  unless  he  felt  confident  of  quickly  win 
ning  them  back  to  his  side.  In  such  circumstances  the  shrewd 
politician  tries  to  wear  a  complacent  look  while  he  waits  until 
compelled  to  decide."— Frederic  Bancroft.  The  Life  of  William 
H.  Seward,  Vol.  II,  pp.  232-233. 

3  Welles,  Lincoln  and  Seward,  pp.  186-187. 


WAR  PROBLEMS  253 

and  the  temper  of  the  British  government  and  pub 
lic.  From  his  correspondence  he  was  well  aware 
that  iii  England  public  opinion  was  now  very 
favorable  to  the  South  and  that  probably  a 
large  majority  in  the  House  of  Commons  would  be 
"  glad  to  find  an  excuse  for  voting  for  the  dismem 
berment  of  the  great  republic."1  Simmer's  belief 
that  the  British  government  would  promptly  resent 
the  seizure  was  speedily  justified  :  a  suitable  apology 
and  the  surrender  of  the  four  men  was  immediately 
demanded,  and  the  British  minister  received  private 
instructions,  in  case  these  demands  were  not  com 
plied  with,  to  end  all  diplomatic  relations  with  the 
United  States  and  take  other  measures  looking  di 
rectly  toward  war.  The  gravity  of  the  situation  was 
further  indicated  by  the  despatching  forthwith  of 
some  8,000  troops  to  Canada  and  by  preparations  to 
strengthen  the  English  fleet  in  American  waters. 

Upon  reaching  Washington,  Sumner  was  relieved 
to  find  that  the  seizure  had  been  absolutely  unauthor 
ized  and  that  the  President  had  grave  misgivings  as 
to  the  capture,  despite  the  almost  unanimous  ap 
proval  of  it  in  his  cabinet  and  throughout  the  coun 
try.2  In  the  Senate  Sumuer  did  his  best  to  prevent 

1  Morley's  Life  of  Golden,  Vol.  II,  pp.  388-390. 

2  The  President's  doubts  and  misgivings,  Welles  declares,  were 
"  increased  after  an  interview  with  Senator  Sumner,  with  whom 
he  often — sometimes  to  the  disgust  and  annoyance  of  Mr.  Sew- 
ard — advised   on  controverted  or  disputed  international  ques 
tions,  and  especially  when   there  were  differences  between  him 
self  and  the  Secretary  of   State.  "—Lincoln  and  Seward,  p.  185. 
Pierce  asserts:     "Such   was  his  confidence  in  Sumner's  judg 
ment  that  he  sometimes  struck  out  passages  from  the  Secretary's 


254  CHARLES  SUMNEK 

debate  upon  the  question,  which  might  embarrass 
the  administration.  On  Christmas  Day  Lincoln 
called  a  special  meeting  of  his  cabinet,  not  to  ex 
change  holiday  greetings  but  to  consider  anxiously 
the  issue  of  peace  or  war.  To  this  grave  council 
Sunnier  also  was  bidden  ;  he  took  part  in  its  delib 
erations,  and  read  letters  relating  to  the  seizure, 
which  he  had  just  received  from  America's  best 
friends  in  England,  Cobdeii  and  Bright/  No  doubt 
remained  that  the  act  of  Wilkes  must  be  disavowed. 
The  very  next  day  Seward  informed  the  British 
minister,  with  suitable  expressions  of  regret,  that 
the  envoys  would  be  given  up,  and  the  incident,  so 
far  as  it  involved  any  threat  of  war,  was  closed.2 

But  among  the  people  at  large  the  affair  left  a 
feeling  of  humiliation  that  the  American  govern 
ment  should  have  disavowed  and  apologized  for  a 
brave  act  of  undoubtedly  patriotic  intent,  which 
had  been  everywhere  hailed  with  delight.  In 
avoiding  war  with  England,  the  administration  had 

despatches  to  which  the  senator  objected."  Vol.  IV,  p.  52, 
n.  4.  Lincoln  used  often  to  consult  Sumner  "as  the  barometer 
of  the  nation's  conscience."  — G.  S.  Merriam,  Life  and  Times  of 
Samuel  Bowles,  Vol.  I,  p.  346. 

'Sumner  did  not  doubt  that  the  refusal  to  give  up  the  envoys 
would  mean  war  with  England,  the  disastrous  consequences  of 
which  he  clearly  forecast  in  his  letter  to  Lieber  of  December  24th. 
Pierce,  Vol.  VI,  p.  58.  Of  great  importance  is  the  painstaking 
account  of  the  "  Trent  affair  "  in  Rhodes,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  521-543, 
with  its  extensive  quotations  from  letters  of  Bright  and  Cobden 
and  Sumner,  and  from  leaders  in  English  newspapers. 

2  How  reluctantly  even  the  President  accepted  the  necessity 
of  releasing  the  envoys  is  indicated  by  quotations  from  Bates's 
diary  in  Nicolay  and  Hay,  Vol.  V,  p.  36.  See  also  Bancroft's 
Life  of  Seward,  Vol.  II,  p.  235-253. 


WAR  PROBLEMS  255 

chilled  loyalty  at  home.1  Two  weeks  later,  accord 
ingly,  when  the  correspondence  in  regard  to  the 
u  Trent  Affair"  was  under  discussion  in  the  Senate, 
Suniner  made  a  tactful  and  comprehensive  speech. 
While  tacitly  exposing  some  of  Se ward's  grave 
errors  in  international  law,  he  not  only  explained 
and  justified  the  surrender  on  the  ground  that  since 
the  envoys  were  not  in  military  service,  neither 

*Mr.  Frederic  Bancroft  frankly  acknowledges  that  at  first 
Seward  did  not  know  that  Wilkes's  act  was  contrary  to  inter 
national  law.  He  characterizes  his  final  reply  to  Earl  Russell 
as  "the  most  studied  and  elaborately  adroit  paper  that  ever 
came  from  Reward's  pen."  Its  full  text  is  to  be  found  in  Sen. 
Ex.  Doc.  No.  8,  37th  Cong.,  2d  Sess.  By  vague  and  disjointed 
citations  from  authorities  in  international  law,  by  "assuming 
an  analogy  where  there  was  none,  and  then  using  his  false  as 
sumption  to  support  his  contention,"  Seward  "made  it  appear 
that  Mason  and  Slidell  were  contraband  of  war,  and  that  there 
fore  Wilkes  was  justified  in  capturing  them  "  ;  but  he  declared 
that  "  by  releasing  the  Trent  instead  of  bringing  her  into  port 
for  judical  examination  and  condemnation,  Wilkes  let  slip  the 
only  chance  of  obtaining  a  legal  justification  for  the  seizure." 
He  even  had  the  "sheer  impudence  " — as  Bancroft  calls  it — to 
assert  that  "  if  the  safety  of  this  Union  required  the  detention 
of  the  captured  persons,  it  would  be  the  right  and  duty  of  this 
government  to  detain  them,"— a  pretense  very  consoling  to 
public  sentiment  in  America,  for  which  it  was  mainly  intended, 
but  which  Earl  Russell,  in  his  reply,  indicated  Great  Britain 
would  under  no  circumstances  have  tolerated.  Bancroft  dis 
cusses  at  length  the  "remarkable  absurdities"  involved  in 
Seward 's  course,  particularly  in  his  subordination  of  the  princi 
ples  and  steady  practice  of  the  United  States,  "which  favored  in 
creasing  the  rights  of  neutrals  and  restricting  belligerent  inter 
ference,"  and  in  his  now  resting  his  whole  argument  on  the 
fact  that  the  Confederates  were  belligerents,  "after  constant 
declarations,  during  eight  mouths,  that  they  were  not  belliger 
ents,  but  insurgents. " 

In  politician's  fashion,  he  made  the  release  which  had  been 
shown  to  be  inevitable.  But  the  judgment  of  Hamilton  Fish 
is  not  too  severe  :  "  We  might  and  should  have  turned  the 


256  CHARLES  SUMNEE 

they  nor  their  papers  were  contraband  of  war  or 
liable  to  seizure,  but  he  went  further  and  laid  much 
stress  upon  the  point  that  the  seizure  had  been  in 
violation  of  long- declared  American  principles, 
while  in  resenting  it  Great  Britain  had  rejected  her 
own  precedents.1  In  the  words  of  George  William 
Curtis  :  "  He  had  silenced  England  by  her  historic 
self.  He  had  justified  America  by  her  own  honor 
able  precedent. "  In  a  letter  to  Bright,  written  on 

affair  vastly  to  our  credit  and  advantage ;  it  has  been  made  the 
means  of  our  humiliation."  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  54.  The  situa 
tion  from  the  outset  had  been  made  more  strained  by  the  be 
lief  prevalent  in  England  that  Seward  was  hostile  in  his  attitude 
toward  that  country,  and  not  to  be  trusted.  Cobden  wrote  to 
Sumner:  "I  confess  I  have  as  little  confidence  in  him  as  I 
have  in  Lord  Palmerston.  Both  will  consult  buncombe  for  the 
moment  without  much  regard,  I  fear,  for  the  future."  In 
citing  these  words,  Mr.  Rhodes  adds:  ''We  may,  I  think,  ac 
cept  as  faithful  this  characterization.''  Vol.  Ill,  p.  533.  Years 
later,  J.  M.  Forbes  wrote  to  Sumner:  "History,  I  am  sure, 
will  give  the  verdict  that  we  got  through  without  foreign  in 
tervention  not  in  consequence  of  Seward 's  management  but  in 
spite  of  it.  His  foreign  policy  was  as  short-sighted,  empirical, 
and  unstatesmanlike  as  his  sixty-day  compromising,  wood- 
cocking  home  policy.  But  for  the  present  *  nil  nisi  lonum '  must 
I  suppose  be  the  word  about  the  wiley  secretary."  April  17, 
1869.  Sumner  Correspondence,  Harvard  Library. 

1  Blaine  dissents  strongly  from  the  grounds  upon  which  Seward 
placed  the  surrender  of  Mason  and  Slidell,  and  declares  :  "The 
luminous  speech  of  Mr.  Sumner  .  .  .  stated  the  ground 
for  which  the  United  States  had  always  contended  with  ad 
mirable  precision."  He  shows  clearly  how  flagrant  and  fre 
quent  had  been  England's  offenses  against  the  principles  for 
which  she  now  contended. — Twenty  Years  of  Congress,  Vol.  I, 
pp.  585-587. 

Although  the  Foreign  Secretary,  Earl  Russell,  made  prompt 
demand  that  "the  seizure  be  disavowed,  and  the  prisoners  set 
free  and  restored  to  British  protection."  there  is  evidence  that 
this  official  despatch  did  not  represent  the  private  opinion  of 
Lord  Palmerston,  the  Prime  Minister.  It  had  been  anticipated 


WAR  PROBLEMS  257 

the  very  day  of  the  speech,  Sumner  frankly  ac- 
kuowleged  that  he  had  perhaps  overemphasized  this 
point,  but  added:  "My  earnest  desire  was  to  do 
something  for  peace;  but  I  was  obliged  to  arouse 
the  patriotism  and  self-respect  of  my  own  country 
men  by  associating  the  surrender  with  American 
principles."  Sumner' s  influence  had  undoubtedly 


that  an  attempt  might  be  made  in  the  British  Channel  to  seize 
the  envoys,  and  on  November  llth,  before  it  was  known  in 
England  that  the  seizure  had  already  been  made  on  the  other 
side  of  the  Atlantic,  the  Prime  Minister  and  six  other  promi 
nent  officers  of  the  government  came  together  to  determine 
what  the  British  government  could  properly  do  in  such  an  event. 
In  a  letter  to  J.  T.  Delaue,  editor  of  the  London  Times,  on  the 
very  day  of  this  conference,  Lord  Palmerston  explains  the  con 
clusion  to  which  they  came:  "  Much  to  my  regret,  it  appeared 
that,  according  to  the  principles  of  international  law  laid  down 
in  our  courts  by  Lord  Stowell,  and  practiced  by  us,  a  belliger 
ent  has  a  right  to  stop  and  search  any  neutral  not  being  a  ship 
of  war,  and  being  found  on  the  high  seas  and  being  suspected 
of  carrying  enemy's  despatches;  and  that  consequently  this 
American  cruiser  might,  by  our  own  principles  of  international 
law,  stop  the  West  India  packet,  seajph  her,  and  if  the  South 
ern  men  and  their  despatches  and  credentials  were  found  on 
board,  either  take  them  out  or  seize  the  packet  and  carry  her 
back  to  New  York  for  trial.  Such  being  the  opinion  of  our 
men  learned  in  the  law,  we  have  determined  to  do  no  more 
than  to  order  the  Phaeton  frigate  to  drop  down  to  Yarmouth 
Roads  and  watch  the  proceedings  of  the  American  within  our 
three  mile  limit  of  territorial  jurisdiction,  and  to  prevent  her 
from  exercising  within  that  limit  those  rights  which  we  cannot 
dispute  as  belonging  to  her  beyond  that  limit.''' 

This  is  a  strikingly  frank  avowal  that  the  act  for  which  his 
ministry  was  about  to  demand  reparation  (probably  out  of  re 
gard  for  popular  sentiment  in  England,  which  had  been  en 
raged  by  the  seizure)  was  indisputably  justified  by  English 
precept  and  practice ;  and  that  these  British  precedents  (as  soon 
proved  in  the  Alabama  controversy)  were  likely  to  prove  much 
in  need  of  reversal.  This  letter  is  reprinted  in  full  in  Outlook 
(N.  Y.),  Jau.  30,  1909,  p.  251.  , 


258  CHARLES  SUMNER 

been  the  most  potent  both  in  effecting  a  peaceful 
solution  and  in  reconciling  the  American  people  to 
the  inevitable  surrender.  His  strong  and  intelligent 
handling  of  this  difficult  case,  in  which  impulse  and 
ignorance  of  international  law  had  threatened  such 
momentous  consequences,  greatly  increased  his 
prestige,  particularly  with  the  conservative  classes, 
heretofore  inclined  to  distrust  him.  Publicists  of 
eminence  warmly  commended  his  speech.  It  was 
declared  "  the  best  thing  for  Surnner's  popularity 
and  reputation  he  has  done."  The  address  had  had 
no  more  unprejudiced  or  keenly  interested  listeners 
than  the  representatives  of  foreign  governments  who 
thronged  the  diplomatic  gallery  in  the  Senate.  Said 
one  of  the  most  accomplished  of  those  diplomats : 
* '  I  have  considered  Mr.  Sumner  a  doctrinaire  j 
henceforth  I  recognize  him  as  a  statesman.'7 1 

During  the  summer  of  1862  not  a  week  passed  that 
Sumner  did  not  call  once  or  more  upon  the  Presi 
dent  to  urge  him  uMnove  directly  against  slavery  j  * 
he  insisted  that  the  putting  forth  of  an  edict  of 
emancipation  on  the  Fourth  of  July  would  make  the 
day  more  sacred  and  historic  than  ever.  Lincoln 
replied  :  u  I  would  do  it,  if  I  were  not  afraid  that 
half  the  officers  would  fling  down  their  arms  and 
three  more  states  would  rise."  He  told  Sumner 

1  G.  W.  Curtis,  Eulogy  of  Sumner,  p.  162. 

2  "  Many  a  time  I  saw  Sumner  restlessly  pacing  up  and  down 
in  his  room  and  exclaiming  with  uplifted  hands  :     '  I  pray  that 
the  President  may  he  right  in  delaying.     But  I  am  afraid,  lam 
almost  sure,  he  is  not.     I  trust  his  fidelity,  but  I  cannot  under 
stand  him.'  "—Carl  Schurz,  Reminiscences,  Vol.  II,  p.  314. 


WAE  PBOBLEMS  259 

early  in  the  session  :  "  You  are  only  a  month  or 
six  weeks  ahead  of  me."  Simmer  repeatedly  de 
clared  himself  so  opposed  to  war  that  he  never 
would  have  favored  beginning  a  conflict  for  the 
abolition  of  slavery,  but  from  the  time  when  the 
South  brought  it  on,  his  conviction  never  could  be 
shaken  that  the  war  could  not  end  and  ought  not  to 
end  without  ending  slavery  also.  Lincoln,  with  his 
graver  responsibilities,  saw  more  clearly  than  did 
Sumuer  the  necessity  of  proceeding  with  caution, 
particularly  with  a  view  to  retaining  the  loyalty  of 
the  border  states.  During  the  session  he  discussed 
with  Sumuer  his  favorite  scheme  for  gradual  and 
voluntary  abolition,  with  compensation  from  the 
national  treasury.  Sumner  frankly  avowed  his  dis 
trust  of  the  practicability  of  the  measure,  but  he  did 
not  antagonize  it  in  the  Senate.  Meantime  the 
President  was  coming  to  the  view  which  Sumner 
had  long  been  urging  upon  him,  and  September  22d 
— probably  as  early  as  it  was  justified — he  issued 
the  Proclamation  of  Emancipation,  which  was  to  be 
come  effective  on  New  Year's  Day  in  the  states  still 
in  revolt.  No  man  in  the  country  had  done  more 
than  Sumner  to  prepare  public  sentiment  to  approve 
and  to  support  this  vitally  important  act. 

Upon  two  diplomatic  negotiations  relating  to 
slavery  Sumner  exercised  great  influence.  The  first 
of  these  was  the  treaty  between  the  United  States 
and  England,  which  made  effective  the  suppression 
of  the  slave-trade  by  the  institution  of  a  mutual 
right  of  search  and  mixed  courts.  Sumner  was 


260  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

present  when  the  treaty  was  signed,  and  upon  his 
speech,  accompanying  the  report  from  his  com 
mittee,  the  Senate  ratified  it  without  dissent.  Both 
Seward  and  the  British  minister  were  exultant,  and 
highly  appreciative  of  Sumner'  s  cooperation.  After 
much  opposition,  he  was  able  to  effect  the  passage  of 
a  bill  for  the  accrediting  of  representatives  from  the 
United  States  to  Hayti  and  to  Liberia  ; ;  a  few  years 
later  he  was  instrumental  in  securing  similar  diplo 
matic  recognition  of  the  Dominican  Eepublic. 

In  this  session  Sumner  for  the  first  time  was  able 
to  see  some  progress  made  along  lines  of  legislation 
against  slavery  which  he  was  incessantly  urging. 
One  such  law  embodied  his  proposal  that  the  em 
ployment  of  the  army  in  the  surrender  of  fugitive 
slaves  be  prohibited.  The  session  had  hardly  be 
gun,  when  he  attacked  the  slave  code  of  the  District 
of  Columbia.  This,  "the  first  open  word  against 
slavery  in  the  District  since  the  break-out  of  the  re 
bellion,"  was  intended  to  help  toward  its  abolition 
in  the  shadow  of  the  Capitol,  and  such  a  result  was 
accomplished  before  the  end  of  the  session  by  a  law 
of  which  Wilson  was  the  especial  champion.  The 
President  felt  doubtful  as  to  certain  provisions  of 
this  bill ;  while  he  was  hesitating  whether  to  sign  it 

1  Ten  years  later  his  continued  services  to  Hayti  were  recog 
nized  by  the  award  of  a  medal,  and  an  order  that  his  portrait  be 
placed  in  its  Capitol.  In  a  courteous  letter  Sumner  expressed 
his  appreciation  of  this  recognition,  but  declined  to  accept  the 
medal,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  not  permitted  under  the  Con 
stitution.  The  Haytian  authorities  accordingly  presented  it  to 
the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts,  and  it  **  now  deposited  in 
the  state  library. 


WAR  PROBLEMS  261 

or  not,  Sunnier  said  to  him  :  "  Do  you  know  who 
at  this  moment  is  the  largest  slave-holder  in  this 
country  t  It  is  Abraham  Lincoln  ;  for  he  holds  all 
the  3,000  slaves  of  the  District,  which  is  more  than 
any  other  person  in  the  country  holds."  Sunnier 
seized  every  opportunity  to  advocate  the  repeal  of 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Law.  He  both  spoke  and  voted 
against  the  bill  by  which  the  state  of  West  Virginia 
was  established,  his  opposition  being  grounded  on 
the  fact  that  that  law  provided  for  gradual  instead^ 
of  immediate  emancipation.1 

It  was  during  this  session  that  Sumner  began  two 
contests  which  were  to  absorb  most  of  his  energies 
for  the  rest  of  his  life.  The  first  of  these  was  his 
struggle  to  secure  for  all  citizens  of  the  United  States, 
regardless  of  color,  equality  of  civic  rights.  His 
present  project  was  to  make  it  possible  for  colored 
persons  to  act  as  witnesses  in  Federal  courts  and  as 
carriers  of  the  mail.  The  second  subject  which  he 
thus  early  was  one  of  the  first  to  urge  upon  the  at 
tention  of  Congress,  was  the  problem  of  reconstruc- 
tion.  On  February  11,  1862,  he  introduced  a  series 
of  resolutions  in  which  he  declared  that  the  seceded 
states  "  had  abdicated  all  rights  under  the  Constitu 
tion,  "  or,  as  he  phrased  it  a  little  later,  had  com 
mitted  "  state  suicide."  a  This  celebrated  doctrine 

1  Wade   and   other   radical   anti-slavery   men    voted   against 
Sumner  on  this  issue.     Elaine,  Twenty  Years  of  Congress,  Vol.  I, 
p.  461. 

2  "  Call  it  suicide,  if  you  will,  or  suspended  animation,  or 
abeyance, — they  have   practically  ceased  to  exist."     Speech  in 
Senate,  May  19,   1862.      Work**  Vol.  VII,  p.  14.     McPherson, 
History  of  the  Rebellion,  pp.  3:32-323. 


262  CHAKLES  BUMNBE 

as  to  the  status  of  the  states  in  revolt  was  promptly 
disavowed  by  prominent  Republican  leaders  in  Con 
gress,  but  it  was  to  play  a  most  important  part  in 
debates  and  legislation  of  later  years.  A  few  weeks 
later  he  strongly  asserted  his  view  that  the  initia 
tion  and  control  of  reconstruction  should  be  by  Con 
gress  and  not  by  the  President,  and  that  at  the  in 
stance  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  of  War  had  no 
right  to  appoint  military  governors  for  seceded 
states.  His  opposition  placed  a  check  upon  this 
practice,  and  led  to  the  withdrawal  of  the  offer  of 
the  military  governorship  of  South  Carolina  to 
Sumner's  intimate  friend  and  biographer,  Edward 
L.  Pierce.1 

Although  Sumner  was  one  of  the  most  radical 
anti-slavery  leaders  in  Congress,  and  although  he 
regarded  the  rebellion,  as  he  told  Gladstone,  as 
11  slavery  in  arms,  revolting,  indecent,  imperious," 
nevertheless  he  looked  forward  to  a  reunited  coun 
try,  and  took  more  magnanimous  ground  than  any 
other  man  in  Congress  in  proposals  to  prevent  the 
perpetuation  of  bitternesses  arising  from  the  war. 
In  this  session  he  offered  a  resolution  declaring  it 
inexpedient  that  the  names  of  victories  won  over 
fellow-citizens  should  be  placed  on  the  regimental 
colors  of  the  United  States,2  and  three  years  later  he 
opposed  hanging  in  the  Capitol  "  any  picture  of  a 
victory  in  battle  with  our  own  fellow-citizens."  In 
both  of  these  matters  he  was  opposed  by  Wilson, 

1  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  78,  n.  3. 

2  Works,  Vol.  VI,  p.  499. 


WAK  PKOBLEMS  263 

chairman  of  the  Senate  Committee  on  Military  Af 
fairs  j  but  Simmer's  stand,  taken  in  the  midst  of  the 
stress  of  war,  accords  with  the  unanimous  verdict  of 
a  later  generation.  In  the  general  work  of  this  his 
toric  session,  Simmer  took  an  active  part,  speaking 
with  discriminating  intelligence  on  a  great  variety 
of  subjects,  in  particular  the  first  of  the  legal  tender 
acts  and  the  internal  revenue  tax  bill.  As  to  the 
legal  tender  act,  Sumner  accepted  the  j  udgment  of 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  that  it  was  rendered 
imperative  by  the  exigency  of  the  hour,  but  added  : 
"  Keluctautly,  painfully,  I  consent  that  the  process 
should  issue,  and  yet  I  cannot  give  such  a  vote  with 
out  warning  the  government  against  the  danger  of 
such  an  experiment.  The  medicine  of  the  Constitu 
tion  must  not  become  its  daily  bread."  1 

In  the  year  1862,  for  the  only  time  in  his  career, 
Sumner' s  reelection  to  the  Senate  was  seriously 
threatened.  The  causes  were  partly  general  and 
partly  personal.  The  lack  of  success  in  prosecuting 
the  war  had  reacted  against  the  Eepublican  admin  - 
istration,  so  that  a  coalition  of  other  party  elements 
now  stood  some  chance  of  making  head.  Many  felt 
that  the  war  was  being  made  an  "  abolition  war," 
and  that  Sumner' s  influence  had  been  one  of  the 
greatest  in  giving  it  that  direction.  His  "state 
suicide"  theory  had  startled  conservatives,  and 
these  added  a  small  but  earnest  group  to  the  oppo 
sition.  Tt  was  also  charged  that  Sumner  was  so  de 
voted  to  anti-slavery  projects  that  he  did  not  attend 

1  Works,  Vol.  VI,  pp   319-345. 


264  CHAKLES  BUMNEB 

to  the  interests  of  the  commonwealth  and  of  his  con 
stituents, — a  charge  which  was  easily  and  completely 
refuted.  But  no  sooner  did  this  movement  to  dis 
place  Suinner  become  apparent,  than  his  supporters 
began  to  rally.  "  Jackson,  Clay  and  Webster," 
says  Pierce,  ' '  drew  to  themselves  hosts  of  friends 
by  their  personal  and  intellectual  qualities,  but 
Suinner  stands  almost  alone  as  a  public  man  whose 
great  support  was  the  moral  enthusiasm  of  the  peo 
ple."  Hundreds  of  young  voters  were  now  coming 
to  the  polls  whose  first  civic  awakening  and  inspira 
tion  could  be  traced  to  Sunnier' s  Lyceum  lectures  j 
his  speeches  in  the  Senate  and  on  the  stump  had 
been  read  at  the  fireside  throughout  the  country  ; 
while  his  fearless  championship  of  freedom  and  the 
sufferings  he  had  endured  in  her  service  appealed 
to  the  chivalrous  loyalty  of  Massachusetts. 

It  is  singular  that  in  two  instances  Sumner's  elec 
tion  was  determined  by  the  use  of  political  devices 
then  highly  exceptional,  but  which  half  a  century 
later  accord  with  the  spirit  of  senatorial  elections  in 
the  most  radical  states,  in  dictating  from  outside  the 
choice  of  senator  to  be  made  by  the  legislature.  In 
his  first  election  this  was  brought  about  by  town- 
meetings  giving  instructions  to  individual  members 
to  vote  for  Sunnier.  In  1862,  his  supporters  re 
solved  to  anticipate  the  election  by  securing  his  en 
dorsement  by  the  convention  of  the  Republican  party, 
which  was  sure  to  control  the  legislature.  This 
making  the  senatorial  election  an  issue  before  the 
convention  was  without  precedent  in  New  England, 


WAE  PROBLEMS  265 

though  the  device  had  attracted  attention  as  a  pre 
liminary  to  the  memorable  Lincoln -Douglas  cam 
paign  in  Illinois  ;  in  recent  years  it  has  reduced  the 
election  of  senators  by  the  legislatures  to  a  mere 
formality  in  most  of  the  Southern  states. 

In  this  convention  of  1862  the  contest  came  over 
a  resolution  expressing  approval  of  the  work  of 
both  Massachusetts  senators,  and  putting  Sumner  in 
nomination  for  reelection  as  "  a  statesman,  a  scholar, 
a  patriot  and  a  man  of  whom  any  republic  in  any  age 
might  be  proud."  At  every  step  this  resolution  was 
antagonized,  in  committee  and  upon  the  floor  of  the 
convention,  the  lead  being  taken  by  the  United 
States  District- Attorney,  an  exceptionally  able  man 
ager  of  political  meetings  ;  but  the  attempt  to  defeat 
it  failed,  and  the  convention  finally  adopted  the 
whole  series  of  resolutions  unanimously.  Despite 
this  authoritative  endorsement  by  the  party,  it  was 
thought  best  that  Sumner  enter  actively  into  the  cam 
paign.  The  preliminary  Emancipation  Proclama 
tion  was  issued  within  a  fortnight  after  the  holding 
of  this  convention.  Scorning  prudential  consider 
ations,  which  would  have  kept  the  slavery  issue  in 
the  background,  Sumner  made  this  proclamation  his 
main  theme,  in  speeches  delivered  before  great  au 
diences  in  the  principal  cities  of  the  commonwealth. 
Vigorous  support  was  forthcoming  from  Whittier 
and  Phillips,  while  Greeley's  leaders  in  the  Tribune 
emphasized  the  vast  importance  to  the  whole  country 
of  the  senator's  reelection.  This  attempt  to  banish 
Sumner  from  public  life  came  to  nothing  :  the  legis- 


266  CHARLES  SUMNER 

lature  carried  out  the  convention's  mandate  by  giv 
ing  him  a  vote  of  227  to  47  for  all  other  candidates. 
At  the  reopening  of  Congress,  Sumner  took  a  quite 
prominent  part  in  the  movement  of  Republican 
senators  to  persuade  Lincoln  to  dismiss  from  his 
cabinet  Seward,  who,  in  his  diplomatic  correspond 
ence,  had  refused  to  recognize  slavery  as  a  cause 
of  the  war  or  as  likely  to  be  affected  by  its  outcome, 
and  who  was  thought  to  have  been  obstructionist 
in  his  attitude  toward  emancipation.  His  culmi 
nating  offense  was  a  passage  in  a  diplomatic  des 
patch  to  Adams,  which  had  recently  come  to  light. 
A  committee  of  nine,  appointed  by  the  Republican 
caucus,  waited  upon  the  President  to  urge  him  to 
"  reconstruct  his  cabinet."  To  their  embarrass 
ment,  at  their  second  conference,  the  committee 
found  that  Lincoln  had  invited  the  cabinet  to 
meet  with  them.  After  prolonged  discussion,  when 
Lincoln  asked,  "  Do  you,  gentlemen,  still  think  that 
Seward  ought  to  be  excused?"  despite  his  many 
years  of  intimacy  with  the  secretary  and  his  family, 
Sumner  joined  with  Grimes,  Trumbull  and  Poineroy 
in  answering,  "Yes";  three  declined  to  commit 
themselves,  one  opposed  the  proposal,  and  one  was 
absent.  The  outcome  was  that  Chase,  whose  dislike 
and  jealousy  of  Seward's  influence  had  been  ill-con 
cealed,  now  found  himself  in  an  exceedingly  embar 
rassing  position,  and  added  his  resignation  to  Sew 
ard's,  which  was  already  in  the  President's  hands. 
u  F  can  ride  on  now  ;  I've  got  a  pumpkin  in  each 
end  of  my  bag,"  was  Lincoln's  comment  to  a  friend. 


WAK  PKOBLEMS  267 

He  prevailed  upon  both  secretaries  to  resume  their 
positions,  but  he  now  held  the  factions  of  his  cab 
inet  in  control,  and  he  had  accomplished  this  with 
out  establishing  what  might  have  proved  a  most 
unfortunate  precedent,  if  he  had  yielded  to  the  pres 
sure  of  the  senatorial  caucus  for  the  expulsion  of 
an  unpopular  secretary. l 

In  midsummer,  1863,  Sumner  was  rejoiced  that 
one  policy  which  he  had  urged  from  the  beginning 
of  the  war  was  put  into  effect  in  the  enlistment  of 
negro  volunteers.  On  the  same  day  was  passed  an 
act  for  the  confiscation  of  the  real  and  personal 
estate  of  rebels.  Sumner7 s  only  interest  in  this  was 
as  a  step  toward  emancipation  and  the  providing 
of  homes  for  the  colored  people.2 

Throughout  the  war,  Sumner  rendered  invaluable 
service  to  the  Union  as  chairman  of  the  Senate 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  Early  in  this 
session  (January,  1863),  when  a  resolution  was  in 
troduced  condemning  French  intervention  in  Mexico, 
Sunmer  opposed  it  vigorously  as  most  ill-timed, 
calculated  to  involve  us  in  war  with  a  power  which 

1  Bancroft,  Life  of  Reward,  Vol.  IT,  pp.  364-369;  Nicolay  and 
Hay,  Abraham  Lincoln,  Vol.  VI,  pp.  263-272  ;  Welles,  Lincoln  and 
Seicard,  pp.  81-85;  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  110-111,  especially  p. 
Ill,  n.  3.  which  summarizes  Sumner's  relations  to  the  several 
members  of  Lincoln's  cabinet.     In  the  account  of  this  episode 
in   his  Diary,  Gideon  Welles  wrote:     ''Grimes,  Sumner  and 
Tmmbull  were  pointed,  emphatic  and  unequivocal  in  their  op 
position  to  Mr.  Seward,  whose  zeal  and  sincerity  they  doubted. 
Each  \v;is  unrelenting  and  unforgiving."     Dec.  20,  1862.     At 
lantic  Monthly,  April,  1909,  p   474. 

2  Act  of  July  17,  1862.     Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  75-77;  Elaine, 
Vol.  I,  pp.  373-375. 


268  CHAELES  SUMNER 

still  professed  friendship,  and  sure  to  give  aid  and 
comfort  to  the  enemy  at  home,  who  was  clearly 
taxing  all  the  nation's  powers.  The  resolution  was 
then  tabled  by  a  decisive  vote.  But  a  year  later  its 
mover  renewed  it  in  more  peremptory  form,  requir 
ing  the  withdrawal  of  the  French  troops  within 
three  mouths.  This  was  referred  to  Suinner's  com 
mittee,  and  here  he  succeeded  in  keeping  it  buried, 
despite  repeated  efforts  by  its  mover  to  get  it  before 
the  Senate.  In  the  House  the  corresponding  com 
mittee  was  headed  by  Henry  Winter  Davis,  who 
ardently  supported  a  resolution  which  the  House 
adopted  by  unanimous  vote,  denouncing  "  any 
monarchical  government  erected  on  the  ruins  of  any 
republican  government  in  America,  under  the  au 
spices  of  any  European  power."  In  the  Senate  this 
was  referred  to  Simmer's  committee,  and  there  it 
was  kept  in  innocuous  confinement.  But  the  pas 
sage  of  this  resolution  by  the  House  had  already 
given  offense  :  demands  for  an  explanation  were 
made  both  by  the  French  minister  at  Washington 
and  by  the  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs  at  Paris.  Sew- 
ard's  replies  affronted  the  dignity  of  the  House  and 
of  Davis  in  particular,  who  proceeded  to  introduce 
another  equally  dangerous  resolution,  which  passed 
the  House  by  a  narrow  majority,  only  to  be  smoth 
ered,  like  its  predecessor,  by  Stunner's  committee. 
In  February,  1863,  a  bill  for  the  granting  of  let 
ters  of  marque  and  reprisal  was  brought  forward, 
backed  by  the  cordial  support  o^Seward  and  Chase. 
Sumner  opposed  it  vigorously  as  countenancing  a  pol- 


WAK  PKOBLEMS  269 

icy  which  civilization  had  rejected,  and  likely  in  its 
working  to  embroil  us  with  foreign  powers.  The  bill 
passed  both  Houses  and  became  a  law  to  the  great  sat 
isfaction  of  both  Seward  and  Chase.  Indeed,  "  Sew- 
ard  felt  this  to  be  something  of  a  triumph  over  Mr. 
Sunnier,  who  often  came  in  conflict  with  his  views, 
and  in  allusion  to  whom,  when  confronted  as  he 
sometimes  was  by  the  President  with  the  senator's 
opinions,  he  remarked,  '  There  were  too  many  Sec 
retaries  of  State  in  Washington.'  "  1  Nevertheless, 
Sumuer's  opposition  did  not  end.  He  appealed  to 
the  President,  addressed  an  open  letter  to  the  New 
York  Board  of  Trade,  and  sent  leaders  to  some  of 
the  principal  papers.  Lincoln  suggested  that  he 
address  the  cabinet,  but  Sumner  deemed  it  more 
becoming  that  he  discuss  the  matter  with  them  indi 
vidually.  The  Secretary  of  the  Navy  and  several 
others  adopted  Sumuer's  view  ;  the  President  sum 
moned  him  to  a  conference  where  they  went  over 
the  whole  matter  of  privateering  reprisals.  It  is 
Welles's  testimony  that  this  interview,  together 
with  a  conference  between  the  President  and  him 
self  in  regard  to  the  only  application  which  had 
been  filed  under  the  act,  "terminated  the  priva 
teering  policy,  and  closed  the  subject  of  letters  of 
marque  and  reprisal  during  the  rebellion."  2 

The  hope  that  foreign  nations,  particularly  France 
or  England,  would  intervene,  was  a  constant  en 
couragement  to  the  Southern  leaders,  and  Sumner, 

1  Welles,  Lincoln  and  Seward,  p.  154. 
8  Ibid.,  pp.  145-164. 


270  CHABLES  SUMNEK 

with  the  purpose  of  doing  "  something  to  lift  the 
tone  of  our  foreign  relations,"  now  determined  that 
the  attitude  of  the  United  States  toward  such  inter 
vention  ought  to  be  made  clear.  After  much  diffi 
culty  he  succeeded  in  carrying  through  his  com 
mittee  a  series  of  resolutions  which  declared  foreign 
mediation  unreasonable  and  inadmissible  in  domestic 
controversies  ;  asserted  that  any  effort  by  a  foreign 
government  to  hinder  the  suppression  of  the  rebel 
lion  was  an  encouragement  of  it,  and  if  repeated 
would  be  considered  an  unfriendly  act ;  attributed 
to  the  hope  of  foreign  intervention  the  vitality  of 
the  rebellion  ;  and  deplored  the  fact  that  the  leaders 
of  the  revolt  had  not  been  given  to  understand  by 
foreign  powers  that  a  new  government,  ' *  with 
slavery  as  its  acknowledged  corner-stone,  and  with 
no  other  declared  object  of  separate  existence,  is  so 
far  shocking  to  the  moral  sense  of  mankind  that  it 
must  not  expect  welcome  or  recognition  in  the  com 
monwealth  of  nations."  *  These  resolutions,  pro 
nounced  by  Lieber  l l  one  of  the  most  collected,  most 
faultless  of  historical  documents/' 2  were  adopted  by 
large  majorities  in  both  Houses,  and  transmitted  to 
our  ministers  abroad  for  communication  to  the 
governments  to  which  they  were  accredited. 

But  Sumner's  influence  in  behalf  of  peace  and 
friendly  feeling  with  England  was  exerted  not  more 
in  his  official  capacity  as  chairman  of  the  Committee 
on  Foreign  Eelations,  than  in  his  private  correspond - 

1  Passed  March  3,  1863.      Works,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  307-312. 
1  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  124. 


WAK  PKOBLEMS  271 

ence  with  the  leaders  of  English  thought.  It  was  a 
bitter  disappointment  to  him  that  many  of  the  men 
of  eminence — scholars,  philanthropists  and  states 
men,  whom  he  had  come  to  love — now  sided  with  the 
South  or  were  without  faith  that  the  North  could 
succeed.  But  in  John  Bright  and  Kichard  Cobden 
he  found  stanch  supporters  of  the  Union.  And  they 
recognized  in  Suniuer  the  fitting  avenue  of  com 
munication  between  the  friends  of  freedom  in  the 
two  lands.  Early  in  the  war  Cobden  had  written  to 
Bright :  "  I  doubt  whether  another  year's  blockade 
will  be  borne  by  the  world.  What  say  you  1  If 
you  agree,  you  should  let  Sumner  know."  l  Their 
letters  to  him  were  full  of  light  upon  changing 
public  sentiment  in  England  and  warnings  as  to  acts 
which  might  alienate  it ;  they  ranked  with  Adams's 
despatches  as  guides  in  cabinet  discussions  regard 
ing  our  relations  with  England.  In  his  letters  to 
these  British  statesmen  and  also  to  the  Duchess  of 
Argyll,  whose  husband  was  in  the  cabinet,  Sumner 
reported  the  changing  conditions  of  the  struggle  and 
the  progress  in  anti-slavery  sentiment  and  legisla 
tion.  Nor  did  he  fail  to  make  clear  to  his  cor 
respondents  how  deeply  Americans  resented  the 
British  government's  laxuess  in  enforcing  neutrality. 
He  declared  that  our  commerce  was  about  "to  be 
driven  from  the  ocean  by  ships  in  which  every 
plank  and  rope,  and  every  arm,  from  the  knife  to 
the  cannon  and  the  crew,  are  British,  and  nothing 
but  the  pirate  officers  rebels  "  ;  he  pointed  out  that 
1  December  6,  1861.  Quoted  by  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  51. 


272  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

in  allowing  such  a  flagrant  breach  of  neutrality 
England  was  laying  down  precedents  which  could 
not  fail  to  be  most  disastrous  to  her  in  future  years  : 
"  A  leading  merchant  said  to  me  this  morning  that 
he  would  give  $50, 000  for  a  war  between  England 
and  Eussia,  that  he  might  turn  England's  doctrines 
against  England."  In  his  letters  as  in  his  speeches, 
^Sumner  took  every  opportunity  to  identify  the  re 
bellion  with  slavery,  and  "  slave-mongers  "  was  the 
epithet  which  with  wearisome  iteration  he  applied 
to  the  Southerners.  His  object  was  to  heap 
ignominy  upon  the  cause  which  underlay  the  at 
tack  upon  the  Union.  He  especially  deplored  Earl 
EusselFs  "  hard,  curt,  captious,  and  cynical  "  des 
patches,  and  his  statement  that  the  Union  and  its 
opponents  "  were  contending,  as  so  many  of  the 
states  of  the  Old  World  have  contended,  the  one 
side  for  empire  and  the  other  for  independence." 
This  thesis  Gladstone  adopted,  declaring  so  often 
and  with  such  apparent  satisfaction  his  belief  that 
the  restoration  of  the  American  Union  by  force  was 
unattainable  that  Sumner  protested:  " Opinions 
are  allies  more  potent  than  subsidies.  .  .  . 
Nothing  is  more  clear  than  that  whoever  assumes  to 
play  prophet  becomes  pledged  in  character  and  pre 
tension  to  sustain  his  prophecy."  l  The  Proclama 
tion  of  Emancipation  and  the  victories  at  Yicksburg 
and  Gettysburg  produced  a  noticeable  change  for 
the  better  in  British  public  opinion  toward  the 

1  Address,  New  York,  September  10,  1663.     Works,  Vol.  VII, 
pp.  351-352. 


WAR  PROBLEMS  273 

North,  but  Gladstone,  even  in  the  winter  of  1863-4, 
declared  in  a  letter  to  Simmer  that  from  the  first  of  the 
war  his  opinion  had  remained  absolutely  the  same.1 

On  the  evening  of  September  10,  1863,  before  an 
audience  of  3,000  in  the  Cooper  Institute, — from 
whose  doors  as  many  more  had  been  turned  away, 
— Suinner  delivered  an  address  on  "  Our  Foreign 
Relations. "  The  occasion  for  this  intense  interest 
was  not  far  to  seek.  The  Florida  and  the  Alabama 
were  already  at  large,  preying  upon  our  commerce, 
and  other  cruisers  and  rams  were  building  in  British 
yards.  The  French  emperor  was  known  to  be  ur 
ging  intervention  upon  an  apparently  not  unwilling 
British  cabinet.  Despite  his  well-known  friendship 
for  England  and  the  English,  Simmer's  speech 
seemed  primarily  an  indictment  of  the  British 
government  for  such  sins  of  omission  and  commis 
sion  as  he  had  been  pointing  out  in  his  letters  to 
Bright  and  Cobden.  He  laid  especial  emphasis  on 
"  the  impossibility  in  a  civilized  age  of  recognizing 
a  new  power  openly  proclaiming  this  barbarism 
[slavery]  as  its  corner-stone,7'  and  argued  at  length 
against  a  government's  being  entitled  to  belligerent 
rights  on  the  ocean,  when  it  had  no  access  to  prize- 
courts,  but  always  burned  its  captured  ships,  and 
none  of  whose  cruisers  ever  touched  a  port  of  the 
pretended  government.1 

Sumner    intended   this  speech   for  a  far  larger 

1  The  frankness  of  Gladstone's  acknowledgment  of  his  mis 
takes  of  judgment  and  of  speech  goes  far  to  disarm  criticism. 
Morley,  Life  of  Gladstone,  Vol.  II,  p.  82. 

1  Works,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  327-392. 


274  CHARLES  SUMNER 

audience  than  that  which  he  faced, l — for  the 
American  public,  before  whom  no  comprehensive 
presentation  of  the  subject  had  been  placed,  and  for 
British  statesmen,  that  they  might  be  warned  for 
the  future  by  seeing  how  deeply  British  lack  of 
sympathy  and  rernissness  in  neutrality  had  offended 
Americans  most  friendly  toward  England.  In 
America  the  address  met  with  wide-spread  ap 
proval.  In  England  it  gave  deep  distress  to  some 
friends  of  Suinner  and  of  the  cause  which  he  repre 
sented,  and  was  criticized  as  grossly  indiscrimiua- 
ting  and  unjust.  It  is  true  that  the  speech  did  not 
take  into  account  the  self-sacrificing  sympathy  of 
the  great  working- classes  and  of  many  English 
leaders  of  thought :  its  censures  were  directed 
against  England  as  represented  by  the  government 
which  had  allowed  the  Alabama  to  escape.  It  was 
felt,  too,  that  Sumner  made  a  serious  mistake  and 
did  injustice  in  bringing  his  indictment  against 

1  Blaine  notes  this  detachment  from  his  immediate  audience 
as  characteristic  of  Sumner  in  many  of  his  speeches.  "He  pre 
sented  his  arguments  with  power,  but  they  were  laborious 
essays.  He  had  no  faculty  for  extempore  speech.  Like  Addi- 
son.  he  could  draw  his  draft  for  a  thousand  pounds,  but  might 
not  have  a  shilling  for  change.  .  .  .  His  written  arguments 
were  the  anti-slavery  classics  of  the  day,  and  the}'  were  read 
more  eagerly  than  speeches  which  produced  greater  effect  on 
the  hearer.  Colonel  Benton  said  that  the  eminent  William 
Pinckney  of  Maryland  was  always  thinking  of  the  few  hundred 
who  came  to  hear  him  in  the  Senate  chamber,  apparently  for 
getting  the  million  who  might  read  him  outside.  Mr.  Sumner 
never  made  that  mistake.  His  arguments  went  to  the  million. 
They  produced  a  wide-spread  and  prodigious  effect  on  public 
opinion  and  left  an  indelible  impression  oa  the  history  of  the 
country."— 1  wenty  Years  of  Congress,  Vol.  I,  p.  318. 


WAR  PEOBLEMS  276 

England  aud  France  together,  since  the  British 
government  had  not  taken  the  initiative  toward  in 
tervention,  but  had  thus  far  resisted  the  pressure 
of  the  French  einperor.  But  the  difficulties  of  the 
moment  were  from  England.  Again,  Suinner  was 
criticized  for  insisting  that  foreign  countries  must 
discriminate  against  the  Confederate  states  because 
their  government  was  based  upon  slavery.  In  so 
doing,  Sunmer  was  following  his  usual  practice  of 
appealing  to  a  higher  law,  regardless  of  whether  its 
behests  had  been  recognized  in  the  currently  ac 
cepted  law  of  nations. 

But  the  turning-point  with  the  British  ministry 
had  already  been  reached.  Two  days  before  Sum- 
uer  launched  these  reproaches,  Earl  Russell  had  in 
formed  the  American  minister  that  instructions  had 
been  issued  that  no  more  Confederate  cruisers  or 
rams  should  be  allowed  to  depart  from  British  ports. 
Nevertheless,  in  spite  of  all  the  friction  it  caused, 
it  cannot  be  doubted  that  Suinner' s  speech  served 
as  a  salutary  warning  that  past  British  remissuess 
had  not  gone  unnoticed  and  that  its  continuance 
would  seriously  imperil  peace  between  the  two 
countries.  Sumner's  own  avowal  to  Lieber  was: 
"On  my  conscience,  after  a  constant  and  minute 
correspondence  on  all  topics  of  my  speech,  I  felt 
that  the  time  had  come  when  the  case  should  be 
stated  to  England  by  a  friend  who  meant  peace  and 
not  war.  My  speech  was  a  warning,  with  a  plead 
ing  for  peace."  But  Sumner  was  not  always  a  good  \ \ 
judge  of  the  conciliatory  effect  of  his  own  words. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

SUMNER   AND   LINCOLN 

IN  the  sessiou  which  opened  in  December,  1863, 
Sunnier  aroused  some  antagonism  by  forcing 
through  a  Senate  rule,  requiring  that  members 
take  the  "iron-clad  oath,"  !  and  by  his  successful 
championship  of  a  bill  requiring  this  oath  of  all 
attorneys  appearing  in  Federal  courts.  The  old 
charge  was  renewed,  that  Sumuer  himself  had  had 
"treason  in  his  heart  and  on  his  lips"  in  taking 
the  oath,  while  avowing  that  he  would  not  assist  in 
the  rendition  of  fugitive  slaves. 

At  this  session  also,  on  Sunnier7 s  motion,  there 
was  constituted  a  special  Committee  on  Slavery  and 
Freedmeu,  and  he  was  made  its  chairman.  To  this 
committee  was  referred  his  bill  for  the  repeal  of  all 
fugitive  slave  laws.  This  measure,  which  he  had 
introduced  almost  as  soon  as  he  had  entered  the 
Senate  twelve  years  before,  and  had  repeatedly 
urged,  still  met  with  strong  opposition,  but  Sumner 
now  kept  forcing  this  and  other  matters  relating  to 
freedmen  upon  the  Senate  with  a  persistence  which 

'This  oath,  prescribed  by  Act  of  Congress  of  Jnly  2,  1862,  re 
quired  all  persons  in  the  civil  and  military  service  of  the  United 
States  to  affirm  past  loyalty  as  well  as  to  pledge  future  allegiance 
to  the  government.  Democratic  senators  had  heretofore  de 
clined  to  take  this  oath,  declaring  that  it  dM  not  apply  to  mem 
bers  of  Congress.  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  175. 


SUMNEK  AND  LINCOLN  277 

called  from  Saulsbury  of  Delaware  the  impatient 
wish  that  the  Senate  might  have  ' l  one  day  without 
the  nigger."  At  last,  after  a  struggle  of  five 
mouths,  success  crowned  his  efforts.  So  far  as 
practical  effect  upon  the  return  of  fugitives  was 
concerned,  this  belated  repeal  was  not  of  much  con 
sequence,  but  Sumuer  deemed  it  of  immense  im 
portance  abroad  ;  in  fact,  within  a  few  weeks  Earl 
Eussell  had  stated  in  the  House  of  Lords  that  the 
retention  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  repelled  sym 
pathy  for  the  Union  cause. 

Other  measures  connected  with  slavery  which 
Suinner  was  largely  instrumental  in  passing  were 
the  abolition  of  the  coastwise  slave-trade ;  the  es 
tablishment — though  for  but  a  limited  term  of  one 
year — of  a  Freedmau's  Bureau,  and  a  prohibition 
of  exclusions  from  street-railway  cars  in  the  Dis 
trict  of  Columbia  on  account  of  color ;  and— what 
he  deemed  of  greatest  importance — a  law  pro 
hibiting  in  all  courts  of  the  United  States  any  dis 
crimination  against  negroes  as  witnesses.  It  is 
characteristic  of  Sumner's  attitude  of  mind  that 
three  of  these  measures  were  forced  through  only 
by  his  loading  them  as  riders  upon  appropriation 
bills  or  as  amendments  of  general  character  upon 
acts  of  special  legislation.  Of  such  transcendent 
importance  did  he  deem  this  extension  of  the  rights 
of  the  freedmen  that  he  would  hesitate  not  a  mo 
ment  to  make  use  of  any  legislative  device,  how 
ever  embarrassing  it  might  later  prove  as  a  prec 
edent. 


278  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Negro  suffrage  now  canie  under  discussion,  and 
Sumuer  joined  earnestly  with  others  in  the  exclusion 
of  any  suffrage  discrimination  on  account  of  color  in 
the  act  for  the  government  of  Montana  Territory, 
making  the  issue  one  of  principle  rather  than  of  im 
mediate  practical  importance.1  Against  the  judg 
ment  of  many,  including  Wilson,  he  also  made  vig 
orous  though  unsuccessful  efforts  to  have  the  suffrage 
extended  to  colored  persons  in  the  District  of  Col 
umbia. 

While  on  his  way  to  Washington,  Sumner  drafted 
a  form  of  petition  for  an  amendment  to  the  Con 
stitution,  declaring  that  "  slavery  shall  be  forever 
prohibited  within  the  limits  of  the  United  States." 
This  form  of  petition,  adopted  a  few  days  later  at 
the  meeting  of  the  American  Anti-slavery  Society, 
is  said  to  have  been  the  first  public  step  toward  the 
Thirteenth  Amendment,  which  at  this  session  was 
approved  by  the  Senate  though  not  by  the  House. 
Sumner,  of  course,  was  one  of  its  most  ardent  advo 
cates.  He  fought  hard,  but  in  vain,  to  secure  a 
phrasing  of  the  Amendment  which  would  not  imply 
any  sanction  of  slavery  even  as  a  punishment  for 
crime.3  In  the  debate  over  this  measure,  his  expres- 

1  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  declared  that  there  was  not  at  the 
time  a  single  negro  in  Montana.  In  the  words  of  a  witty 
Southerner,  u  The  whole  controversy  over  the  territories  related 
to  an  imaginary  negro  in  an  impossible  place." 

2 The  form  which  he  proposed  in  the  Senate,  February  8, 
1864,  was  as  follows:  "Everywhere  within  the  limits  of  the 
United  States  and  of  each  state  or  territory  thereof,  all  persons 
are  equal  before  the  law,  so  that  110  person  can  hold  another  as 
a  slave.'' 


SUMNER  AND  LINCOLN  279 


siou,  "  Nothing  against  slavery  can  be  uncoustitu 
tional,"  showed  the  temper  in  which  he  always  ap 
proached  legal  questions.  It  was  from  the  stand 
point  of  the  idealist  rather  than  of  the  jurist. 

In  pushing  forward  these  anti-slavery  bills  Sum- 
uer  showed  a  pertinacity  which  exacted  acknowl 
edgment  of  his  power,  but  did  not  tend  to  make 
him  liked  by  his  colleagues.  Upon  a  measure  which 
many  at  first  distrusted,  he  would  keep  forcing  them 
to  put  themselves  upon  record,  until  at  last  his  im 
portunity  or  their  fear  of  popular  sentiment  brought 
them  to  yield.  To  the  question  whether  such  nag 
ging  persistency  would  prove  good  policy,  Sumner's 
reply  would  have  been  the  words  he  used  at  one 
stage  in  these  debates  :  "  The  main  proposition  is  to 
strike  slavery  wherever  you  can  hit  it." 

Yet  he  did  not  neglect  topics  of  a  more  general 
interest.  It  was  at  this  session  that  he  made  a  most 
exhaustive  report  upon  the  "  French  Spoliation 
Claims,'7  which  had  been  urged  upon  Congress  for 
sixty  years,  and  strongly  advocated  a  bill  for  their 
payment.  Four  times,  at  later  sessions,  this  report 
was  adopted  or  reprinted  as  the  authoritative  sum 
ming  up  of  the  case,  before  Congress  at  last,  in  1885, 
authorized  the  payment  of  the  claims.1  Sumner  an 
ticipated  public  sentiment  by  introducing,  on  April 
30,  1864,  a  bill  to  provide  for  a  system  of  competi 
tive  examinations  for  minor  offices  in  the  civil  serv 
ice,  and  for  the  prohibition  of  removals  except  for 

1  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  187-188.  Actual  payments  began  in 
1891. 


ill 


280  CHABLES  SUMNEE 

good  cause.  This  was  the  beginning  of  the  move 
ment  in  Congress  for  the  reform  of  the  civil  service. 
Suinner  had  matured  the  measure  without  consult 
ing  other  senators ;  he  was  so  convinced  that  it 
could  not  be  passed  in  this  crowded  session  that  he 
himself  moved  that  it  be  laid  upon  the  table,  and  he 
was  too  engrossed  with  other  cares  to  call  it  up. 
But  he  had  long  believed  that  rotation  in  office, 
while  justifiable  in  political  posts,  was  absurd  in  the 
machinery  of  administration  and  was  convinced  that 
the  reform  which  he  proposed  would  have  a  bene 
ficial  effect  on  our  national  credit  and  everywhere 
else.  He  was  both  surprised  and  gratified  at  the 
favorable  comments  which  his  bill  called  forth  from 
friends  and  from  some  of  the  leading  papers. 

Upon  the  approach  of  the  presidential  campaign 
of  1864,  Suinner  shared  the  opinion  of  perhaps  the 
majority  of  public  men  (who  in  a  few  months  were 
to  be  the  President's  eulogists)  that  Lincoln  lacked 
practical  talent  for  his  position  of  transcendent  im 
portance,  and  that  in  the  presidency  "  there  should 
be  more  readiness  and  also  more  capacity  for  govern 
ment."  But  he  took  no  part  in  the  many  confer 
ences  looking  toward  the  substitution  of  another 
candidate,  repeatedly  affirming  that  nothing  could 
be  done  except  with  Lincoln's  good-will.  He  put 
on  record  some  strange  judgments,  which  he  himself 
must  soon  have  repudiated.  To  Cobden  on  Septem 
ber  18,  1864,  he  wrote  :  "If  he  [Lincoln]  had  pa 
triotically  withdrawn,  and  given  his  support  to  any 
nominee  of  a  new  convention,  whoever  he  might  be, 


SUMNER  AND  LINCOLN  281 

— any  one  of  a  hundred  names, — I  am  very  sure  the 
nominee  would  be  elected.  .  .  .  The  President 
made  a  great  mistake  in  compelling  him  [Chase]  to 
resign.  It  was  very  much  as  when  Louis  XVI. 
threw  overboard  Necker, — and,  by  the  way,  I  have 
often  observed  that  Mr.  Lincoln  resembles  Louis 
XVI.  more  than  any  other  ruler  in  history.  I  once 
said  to  Chase  that  I  should  not  be  astonished  if,  like 
Necker,  he  was  recalled  ;  to  which  he  replied, 
4  That  might  be  if  Mr.  Lincoln  were  king  and  not 
politician.7  "  1 

But  as  soon  as  the  Democratic  platform  was  made 
public,  with  its  assertion  that  the  war  had  been 
"  four  years  of  failure,"  Sunnier  declared  that  "  all 
opposition  to  Lincoln  disappears  at  the  promulga 
tion  of  the  Chicago  treason,"  and  in  many  speeches 
he  did  stalwart  service  to  secure  the  President's  re 
election.  While  the  campaign  was  still  in  progress, 
there  came  an  interesting  illustration  of  Lincoln's 
magnanimity,  when  Taney's  death,  for  months  an 
ticipated  as  imminent,  made  vacant  the  chief -justice 
ship  of  the  Supreme  Court.  Early  in  the  year  Sum- 
ner  had  urged  Chase's  name  upon  the  President  as 
the  best  appointment.  But  meantime  Lincoln  had 
forced  Chase  to  withdraw  from  the  cabinet.  Never 
theless,  both  by  letter  and  by  personal  interview, 
Suniner  now  renewed  his  advocacy  of  Chase's  ap 
pointment,  which,  after  some  delay,  was  made. 
Soon  after  the  new  Chief  Justice  had  taken  his  seat, 
Sumner  found  intense  satisfaction  in  moving  the 
1  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  200. 


282  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

admission  of  a  certain  colored  lawyer  as  counselor 
before  the  tribunal  where  Taney  had  pronounced 
the  decision  which  denied  citizenship  to  men  of  his 
race.  This  Dred  Scott  Decision  seemed  to  Sunnier 
such  an  atrocity  that  he  joined  with  other  sena 
tors  in  temporarily  successful  opposition  to  the 
placing  of  a  bust  of  Taney  in  the  chamber  of  the  Su 
preme  Court.  * 

Sumuer  brought  himself  into  strange  company  by 
his  earnest  opposition  to  the  resolution  reported 
from  the  Committee  on  Military  Affairs  for  the  es 
tablishment  of  retaliation  in  kind  upon  Confederate 
prisoners  of  war.  He  did  not  deny  that  retaliation 
was  a  recognized  right  under  the  laws  of  war,  but 
urged  that  such  forms  as  virtual  starvation  and  dep 
rivation  of  necessary  clothing  and  medicines,  from 
which  Union  soldiers  were  alleged  to  have  suffered 
in  Southern  prisons,  could  not  be  applied  without 
grave  deterioration  of  the  national  character. 


bill,  reported  by  Trnmbull,  called  out  angry  debate 
from  quite  a  number  of  senators.  Sumner  declared  that  "Taney 
would  be  hooted  down  the  pages  of  history,  and  that  an  eman 
cipated  country  would  fix  upon  his  name  the  stigma  it  deserved  . 
He  had  administered  justice  wickedly,  had  degraded  the  judi 
ciary,  and  had  degraded  the  age."  Reverdy  Johnson  eulogized 
Taney,  and  asserted  that  u  the  senator  from  Massachusetts  will 
be  happy  if  his  name  shall  stand  as  high  upon  the  historic  page 
as  that  of  the  learned  judge  who  is  no  more."  Nine  years  later, 
when  all  but  ftumner  of  those  who  had  spoken  in  these  earlier 
debates  had  ceased  to  be  members  of  the  Senate,  there  was  pre 
sented  a  bill  for  conferring  the  same  tribute  of  respect  upon 
Tauey  and  upon  Chase,  who  had  just  died  in  the  chief-justice 
ship;  this  was  passed  without  debate  and  with  the  unanimous 
consent  of  the  Senate.  —  Elaine,  Twenty  Zeara  of  Congress,  Vol. 
1,  pp.  135-137. 


SUMNER  AND  LINCOLN  283 

Working  with  Democrats  who  were  ordinarily  his 
bitter  opponents,  Simmer  was  able  to  secure  the 
Senate's  assent  to  certain  amendments  requiring 
that  the  retaliation  be  in  conformity  with  the  laws 
and  usages  of  warfare  among  civilized  nations. 

The  first  year  of  the  war  was  hardly  past  when 
the  problem  of  reconstruction  began  to  engage  at 
tention.  Although  the  suppression  of  the  insurrec 
tion  had  proved  a  harder  task  than  was  anticipated, 
it  was  felt  that  if  civil  governments  were  speedily 
established  in  states  which  had  come  within  Union 
control,  they  would  serve  as  gathering- points  for 
national  sentiment,  and  would  make  a  most  favor 
able  impression  upon  public  opinion  abroad  as  an 
evidence  that  orderly  democratic  government  was 
soon  to  be  restored  in  the  states  which  had  been  in 
revolt. 

Upon  this  problem  Sumner  was  one  of  the  first  to 
put  himself  upon  record,1  and  no  other  public  man's 
attitude  and  influence  had  more  to  do  with  de 
termining  the  course  which  reconstruction  finally 
took.  Hardly  six  months  had  passed  since  the  dis 
aster  at  Bull  Run  when  Sumuer,  on  February  11, 
1862,  introduced  a  series  of  resolutions,  the  cardinal 
feature  of  which  was  his  insistence  that  the  de 
termination  of  the  procedure  by  which  the  seceded 
states  should  resume  functions  of  government  and 
be  restored  to  normal  relations  with  the  Union,  must 
rest  with  Congress.  In  his  opinion  the  seceded 
states  had  virtually  committed  "  state  suicide, "  and 

1  Supra,  pp.  261-262. 


284  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

it  was  now  perfectly  competent  to  Congress  to  make 
all  rules  and  regulations  for  such  territory  as  for 
any  other  territory  or  property  of  the  United  States. ! 

In  the  spring  of  1862  military  governors  were  ap 
pointed  by  the  President  for  Louisiana,  Arkansas, 
Tennessee,  and  North  Carolina.  Forthwith  in 
Louisiana,  in  accordance  with  orders  issued  by  this 
military  governor,  two  representatives  (Halm  and 
Flanders)  were  elected  ;  and  upon  their  arrival  in 
Washington  the  House  of  Eepreseutatives  accepted 
their  credentials  and  admitted  them  as  members  of 
the  House,  "  though  not  without  contention  and 
misgiving."  2  In  December,  1863,  the  President's 
message  set  forth  his  programme  of  reconstruction  : 
State  governments  were  to  be  established  on  the 
basis  of  one-tenth  or  more  of  the  number  of  votes 
cast  at  the  last  national  election,  and  voters  were 
to  be  required  to  pledge  themselves  to  allegiance  to 
the  Constitution  and  laws  and  the  proclamations 
relating  to  slavery.  During  the  next  two  months, 
in  accordance  with  a  proclamation  of  General 
Banks,  the  commander  of  the  department,  elections 
were  held,  the  voting  being  confined  to  ' '  male  white 
citizens,"  a  constitution  was  adopted  and  state  of 
ficers  were 'chosen.  In  Arkansas  the  same  procedure 
had  been  followed.3 

In  Congress  these  acts  of  the  Executive  met  with 

1  Constitution,  Art.  IV,  Sec.  Ill,  Par.  2. 

v  Blaine,  Ttventy  Years  of  Congress,  Vol.  II,  p.  36. 

3  The  character  of  the  correspondence  which  led  to  these  steps 
is  indicated  by  letters  between  Lincoin  and  Banks.  Nicolay 
and  Hay,  Lincoln,  Vol.  VIII,  pp.  427-430. 


SUMXER  AND  LINCOLN  285 

prompt  protest,  and  the  House  soon  passed  a  bill 
providing  a  method  of  reconstruction  which  differed 
from  that  of  the  President  principally  in  its  insist 
ence  that  a  majority,  instead  of  merely  one-tenth, 
of  the  white  male  citizens,  of  the  age  of  twenty -one 
or  over,  should  take  the  oath  to  support  the  Consti 
tution  of  the  United  States  before  they  could  par 
ticipate  in  initiating  the  state  governments,  and  in 
the  requirement  that  the  new  constitution  of  each 
state  prohibit  slavery  forever.  In  both  branches  of 
Congress  the  attempt  was  made  to  cut  out  the  re 
striction  of  the  suffrage  to  whites,  but  it  failed,  only 
five  votes  being  cast  in  its  support  in  the  Senate. 
It  is  said  that  here  for  the  last  time  Sumner  was 
ready  to  waive  his  objection  to  such  restriction  of 
the  suffrage,  provided  the  bill  asserting  Congress's 
power  to  control  reconstruction  could  be  passed, 
together  with  a  declaration  that  the  Louisiana  pro 
cedure  was  no  precedent  and  that  freedom  should 
be  secured.  But  this  bill  the  President  killed  by  a 
pocket  veto  ;  for  he  was  firmly  of  the  opinion  that 
Congress  had  no  authority  to  abolish  slavery  within 
the  states,  and  he  believed  that  the  delicate  adjust 
ments  of  reconstruction  could  be  better  effected  by 
one  man  than  by  from  two  to  three  hundred  men  in 
two  jealous  branches  of  Congress.1 

In  Jane,  1864,  the  concrete  question  came  before 
the  Senate  on  a  ret  rlution  to  recognize  the  govern - 

1  Proclamation  of  Jnly  H,  1864.  The  bill  is  reprinted  in  full 
in  Macdonald's  Select  Statutes  of  United  States  History,  1861- 
1898,  pp.  124-12f 


286  CHARLES  SUMNEK 

ment  of  Arkansas.  Suinner  spoke  briefly  but  with 
great  earnestness  in  opposition  to  the  measure. 
This  speech  showed  the  extent  to  which  already 
"  the  two  most  influential  men  in  public  life  were  at 
variance."  l  Sunnier  objected  to  the  irregularity  of 
the  proceedings  by  which  the  government  had  been 
organized  under  military  orders  within  a  territory 
hardly  subjugated,  but  laid  most  stress  upon  the 
contention  that  the  states  which  had  been  in  revolt 
could  be  readmitted  to  statehood  only  by  act  of 
Congress.  A  resolution  of  his  own  was  at  this  time 
pending — adopted  in  substance  two  years  later — 
providing  :  "  That  a  state  pretending  to  secede  from 
the  Union  and  battling  against  the  national  govern, 
ment  to  maintain  this  pretense,  must  be  regarded 
as  a  rebel  state,  subject  to  military  occupation,  and 
without  title  to  be  represented  on  this  floor  until  it 
has  been  readmitted  by  a  vote  of  both  Houses  of 
Congress ;  and  the  Senate  will  decline  to  entertain 
any  application  from  any  such  rebel  state  until  after 
such  vote  of  both  Houses  of  Congress."  2  Both  reso 
lutions  were  referred  to  the  Committee  on  the  Judi 
ciary,  of  which  Trumbull  was  chairman,  and  were 
reported  unfavorably,  as  were  also  the  credentials 
of  the  persons  claiming  admission  as  senators  from 
Arkansas. 

1  Rhodes,  Vol.  V,  p.  55. 

2  May   27th.     McPherson,    History  of  the  Rebellion,  p.  320. 
Works,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  470.     See  similar  resolutions  of  February 

23,  1865  and  March  8,  1865.  Works,  Vol.  IX,  pp.  311  and 
340.  In  the  House,  Garfield  and  Dawes  proposed  resolutions 
of  like  character,  June  13  and  22,  1864. 


SUMNER  AND  LINCOLN  287 

Iii  February,  1865,  however,  substantially  the 
same  question  arose  over  the  resolution  reported 
from  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  of  which 
Trumbull  was  still  chairman,  recognizing  the  gov 
ernment  of  Louisiana.  Personal  conference  with 
the  President  had  apparently  brought  about  this 
change  of  Trumbull' s  views.  Lincoln  was  so 
strongly  committed  to  his  scheme  of  reconstruction 
that  the  senators  were  reluctant  to  speak  openly  in 
opposition.  Sumner  had  again  and  again  urged 
him  to  "have  no  break  with  Congress  on  such 
questions." l  As  to  his  own  ground  he  had  no 
hesitation  :  from  this  time  forward,  leaving  for 
the  most  part  to  others  the  protest  against  the 
irregularity  in  the  initiation  of  the  government  by 
military  orders  and  the  inadequacy  of  the  voting 
population  on  which  such  government  was  based, 
Sumner  now,  alone,  began  his  fight  to  prevent  the 
admission  of  any  state  which  did  not  guarantee 
freedom  and  equality  at  the  polls  as  well  as  before 
the  courts  to  colored  people  on  precisely  the  same 
terms  as  to  whites.  To  this  struggle  for  absolute 
equality  of  civil  rights  the  greater  part  of  his 
strength  for  the  rest  of  his  life  was  to  be  devoted. 
To  it  he  brought  all  the  intensity  of  conviction,  all 
the  determination  and  fearlessness  in  debate  which 
he  had  formerly  devoted  to  securing  the  repeal  of 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  and  the  proclaiming  of 
emancipation.  His  attitude  was  affirmed  both  by 
word  and  deed  :  "  I  think  it  [the  measure]  dauger- 

1  Letter  to  Bright,  Jan.  1,  1865.     Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  221. 


288  CHARLES  SUMNER 

ous  j  and  thinking  it  dangerous,  I  am  justified  in 
opposing  it,  and  justified,  too,  in  employing  all  the 
instruments  that  I  find  in  the  arsenal  of  parliamen 
tary  warfare." *  Eiders,  dilatory  motions,  objec 
tions,  talking  against  time, — all  of  these  Sumner 
used  without  hesitation.  In  these  early  days  of 
this  ten  years'  struggle,  when  senators  interrupted 
him  with  cries,  "Don't  waste  time!"  "Give 
up!"  his  reply  was,  "That  is  not  my  habit." 
"We  know  that!"  came  the  response,  with 
laughter.  The  debate  was  full  of  sharp  person 
alities.  Sumner  found  one  of  his  principal  allies 
in  a  senator  from  Kentucky,  but  Wade  proved  his 
most  zealous  supporter.  Sumner  now  asserted,  as 
many  times  later,  that  the  Union  needed  the  ballots 
as  well  as  the  muskets  of  colored  men.2 

The  resolution  had  been  brought  in  only  about  a 
week  before  the  end  of  the  session,  and  the  ap 
propriation  and  revenue  bills  were  still  to  be  con 
sidered.  The  result  was  that  by  persistent  filibus 
tering  Sumner  and  a  dozen  other  senators  prevented 
a  Vote  upon  the  recognition  of  Louisiana.  For  the 
absolute  equality  of  the  colored  race  as  a  condition 
of  readmission,  Sumner  had  made  his  fight  alone, 
and  his  influence  more  than  that  of  any  other 
blocked  the  recognition  of  the  state,  which  was  the 
vital  point  for  reconstruction  in  accordance  with 
the  Lincoln  plan.  Even  before  the  debate  in  the 

'February  25,  1865. 

*  See  Sumner's  resolution  of  Feb.  2£,  1865.  McPherson,  p. 
580. 


SUMNEK  AND  LINCOLN  289 

Senate  began,  Lincoln  is  said  to  have  declared  : 
"I  can  do  nothing  with  Mr.  Sumuer  in  these  mat 
ters.  While  Mr.  Suinner  is  very  cordial  with  me, 
he  is  making  his  history  in  an  issue  with  me  on 
this  very  point."  l  In  his  great  disappointment 
at  the  outcome  of  the  contest,  Lincoln  took  no  pains 
to  conceal  the  fact  that  he  considered  Sunmer 
chiefly  responsible  for  the  defeat  of  his  favorite 
measure.  In  cabinet  meeting  on  the  very  last  day 
of  his  life,  Lincoln  declared  :  "  These  humanita 
rians  break  down  all  state  rights  and  constitutional 
rights.  Had  the  Louisianians  inserted  the  negro 
in  their  Constitution,  and  had  that  instrument  been 
in  all  other  respects  the  same,  Mr.  Sumner  would 
never  have  excepted  to  that  Constitution."  2 

The  relations  between  Lincoln  and  Sumner  dur 
ing  the  last  weeks  of  the  President's  life  afford  an 
interesting  study.  Sumner  had  just  blocked  a 
project  on  which  Lincoln's  heart  was  set.  Yet,  far 
from  cherishing  resentment,  Lincoln  showed  him 
more  signs  of  personal  regard  than  to  any  other  man 
in  public  service.  It  is  hard  to  see  much  basis  for 
congeniality  in  two  men  so  utterly  unlike.  li Sum 
uer,"  Lincoln  once  said,  "is  my  idea  of  a  bishop." 
Certainly  the  Massachusetts  senator  had  been  un 
remitting  in  his  efforts  to  point  out  to  the  President 
the  precise  line  of  his  duty.  It  is  far  easier  to  un 
derstand  how  Mrs.  Lincoln  should  have  come  to 

1  Nicolay  and  Hay,  Lincoln,  Vol.  X,  p.  85. 
2 Ibid.,    pp.    282-285.     Welles,     The    Galaxy,    April,    1872, 
p.  526. 


290  CHARLES  SUMHEB 

have  a  great  admiration  for  Simmer.  His  elo 
quence  and  humanitarian  zeal  always  made  a  strong 
appeal  to  high-minded  women.  Though  of  South 
ern  origin,  the  wife  of  the  President  had  come  to 
sympathize  with  a  radical  anti-slavery  policy.  In 
her  zeal  and  inexperience  she  even  took  such  sur 
prising  steps  as  the  sending  of  notes  to  Sunmer, 
repeatedly  urging  him  to  oppose  the  appointment 
to  the  cabinet  of  a  man  of  whom  she  did  not  ap 
prove.1  Sumuer's  foreign  travel  and  acquaintance 
impressed  Mrs.  Lincoln,  who  was  interested  in 
French,  and  enjoyed  discussing  French  books  with 
him.  On  the  eve  of  the  inauguration  ball  came  an 
autograph  note  from  the  President  inviting  Sumner 
to  accompany  him  to  that  function,  and  the  Presi 
dent's  carriage  called  for  him.  As  the  party  en 
tered  the  ballroom,  Sumner  escorting  Mrs.  Lincoln, 
there  were  many  who  inferred  that  Lincoln  had  ac 
cepted  Sumner' s  reconstruction  policies. 

According  to  his  custom,  Sumuer  remained  in 
Washington  for  some  time  after  the  end  of  the  ses 
sion,  to  finish  up  business  and,  also,  to  bring  to 
bear  what  influence  he  could  in  favor  of  his  plan  of 
reconstruction.  During  these  weeks  apparently 
Lincoln  and  Sumner  were  each  seeking  the  other  in 
the  hope  of  making  a  convert.  On  one  occasion 
Sumner  had  a  midnight  conference  with  the  Presi 
dent  in  regard  to  a  case  calling  for  executive 
clemency,  and  came  to  the  President's  office  early 
the  next  morning  by  appointment  to  receive  the 
'Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  221,  n.  2,  and  pp.  230-231. 


SUMNER  AND  LINCOLN  291 

documents.  While  Sumner  was  taking  some  notes, 
the  President  broke  out  into  praise  of  ' i  Petroleum 
V.  Nasby,"  and  declared  that  he  must  "  initiate  " 
Sumuer,  adding  :  * '  For  the  genius  to  write  these 
things  I  would  gladly  give  up  my  office."  There 
upon  he  proceeded  for  nearly  half  an  hour  to  regale 
the  cultured  Massachusetts  senator  with  that  u  pa 
triotic  literature"  until  Surnner,  "thinking  there 
must  be  many  at  the  door,  waiting  to  see  the  Presi 
dent  on  grave  matters,  took  advantage  of  a  pause, 
and,  thanking  him  for  the  lesson  of  the  morning, 
left,"  passing  through  the  anteroom,  which  he  found 
thronged  with  twenty  or  thirty  persons,  including 
senators  and  representatives.1 

A  few  days  later  the  President  left  Washington 
for  the  headquarters  of  the  Army  of  Virginia. 
Sumner  was  to  have  accompanied  Mr.  and  Mrs. 
Lincoln  to  the  opera  on  April  5th,  as  he  had  done 
on  the  last  occasion  when  the  President  had  at 
tended  the  theatre  ;  but  plans  were  now  changed, 
and  on  that  day  in  a  party  of  eight  he  accompanied 
Mrs.  Lincoln  to  City  Point,  where  they  joined  the 
President.  Thence  the  party  went  to  Richmond , 
where  with  an  escort  of  cavalry  they  made  visits  to 
the  chief  points  of  interest.  Sumner  gratified  his 
collector's  passion  by  securing  for  Stanton  the  gavel 
which  had  been  used  in  the  Confederate  Congress. 
The  next  day  the  President  and  his  party  went  to 

1  Works,  Vol.  IX.  p.  360.  Sumner  wrote  an  account  of  this 
episode  as  an  introduction  to  a  new  edition  of  Nashy's  letters,  is 
sued  in  1872. 


292  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Petersburg,  and  on  the  following  day  visited  the 
sick  and  wounded  in  the  tent  hospitals  at  City 
Point.  Here  Lincoln  shook  hands  with  five  thou 
sand  sick  and  wounded  soldiers,  and  yet  declared  to 
Sumner  that  his  arm  was  not  tired.1  They  returned 
to  Washington  on  the  River  Queen,  as  Sumner  wrote 
to  the  Duchess  of  Argyll,  "  breakfasting,  lunching 
and -dining  in  one  small  family  party."  In  these 
four  days  of  intimate  association,  Sumner  came  to 
appreciate  some  points  in  Lincoln's  character  which 
he  had  perhaps  little  suspected.  To  the  few  friends 
upon  the  boat  the  President  quoted  Longfellow's 
"  Resignation  "  and  on  Sunday  read  from  his  favorite 
play,  " Macbeth."2 

The  party  reached  "Washington  on  the  evening  of 
the  9th.  The  next  day  Sumner  received  from  the 
White  House,  with  a  bunch  of  flowers,  a  special 
message  ann6uncing  Lee's  surrender.  On  the  fol 
lowing  day  came  an  invitation  to  him  to  bring  a 
friend  to  the  White  House  to  see  the  illumination  in 
celebration  of  the  surrender,  but  for  some  reason 

1  Works,  Vol.  IX,  p.  410. 

3  With  the  strange  premonitory  mysticism  which  Lincoln 
often  showed,  the  passage  over  which  he  lingered  and  which  he 
read  a  second  time  to  this  group  of  his  friends  was  the  words  of 
Macbeth  : 

"  Duncan  is  in  his  grave  ; 
After  life's  fitful  fever  he  sleeps  well ; 
Treason  has  done  his  worst :  nor  steel,  nor  poison, 
Malice  domestic,  foreign  levy,  nothing, 
Can  touch  him  further." 

—ACT  III,  So.  II,  11.  23-27. 

Works,  Vol.  IX,  pp.  408,  416.  Marouis  de  Cham  bran's 
"Recollections  of  Sumner,"  Scribner's  Magazine,  January, 
1893,  pp.  33,35. 


SUMNER  AND  LINCOLN  293 

this  was  not  accepted.  In  response  to  calls  from 
the  crowd,  the  President  that  evening  made  his  last 
public  speech.  To  the  surprise  of  the  listeners,  he 
took  this  occasion  to  defend,  in  a  long,  earnest  argu 
ment,  his  course  in  regard  to  Louisiana.  On  reading 
the  address  the  next  day,  Sumiier  confided  to  Lieber 
his  forebodings:  u  The  President's  speech  and 
other  things  augur  confusion  and  uncertainty  in 
the  future,  with  hot  controversy.  Alas  !  alas  !  " 
Thursday  evening  Suinner  was  again  invited  to  the 
White  House  to  see  the  illumination  in  company 
with  General  Grant.  It  is  not  known  whether  these 
two,  who  in  later  years  were  to  be  brought  into  such 
bitter  opposition,  met  here  for  the  first  time.  The 
next  day,  the  fatal  14th  of  April,  in  cabinet  meet 
ing  Lincoln  reasserted  his  view  as  to  reconstruction, 
mentioned  Surnuer's  opposing  opinion,  and  in 
timated  that  it  was  providential  that  the  end  of  the 
rebellion  came  when  the  question  of  reconstruction 
could  be  considered,  as  far  as  the  Executive  was 
concerned,  without  interference  from  Congress.1 

That  evening  Lincoln  was  assassinated.  The 
news  of  the  crime  spread  rapidly.  It  came  to  Sum- 
ner  as  he  was  talking  with  friends.  He  went  to  the 
White  House  immediately,  supposing  that  the 
President  had  been  taken  thither,  and  thence  to  the 
house  where  the  stricken  man  lay.  There  in  the 
gray  hours  of  dawn  he  sat,  holding  the  hand  that 
had  freed  the  slave,  and  sobbing  like  a  child.  As 
Lincoln  breathed  his  last,  his  son  stood  leaning 
1  Welles,  in  The  Galaxy,  April,  1872,  pp.  525-527. 


294  CHAKLES  SUMNEE 

upon  Suiniier's  arm.  The  senator  then  entered  a 
carriage  with  General  Halleck,  who  stopped  at  the 
hotel  where  Johnson  was  lodging  to  inform  him 
that  he  must  not  go  out  without  a  guard.  From  here 
they  drove  to  Seward's  house,  where  a  single  assas 
sin  had  wounded  six  persons.  On  reaching  his  own 
lodgings,  Summer  found  that  Stantou  had  already 
posted  a  squad  of  soldiers  there,  as  Sumner' s  life, 
also,  was  reported  to  be  in  danger. 

In  the  joint  gathering  of  senators  and  representa 
tives  then  in  Washington,  Sumner  was  made  chair 
man  of  the  committee  which  prepared  the  resolu 
tions  and  made  other  preparations  for  the  represen 
tation  of  Congress  in  the  funeral  ceremonies.  On 
the  1st  of  June,  the  commemoration  day  appointed  by 
President  Johnson,  by  invitation  of  the  Boston  city 
government,  Sumner  pronounced  the  eulogy  upon 
Lincoln  in  Faneuil  Hall.  He  told  the  story  of  the 
dead  statesman's  rise  to  power  and  bore  witness  to 
his  great  qualities  of  mind  and  heart,  criticizing 
only  what  had  seemed  to  the  speaker  a  slowness  in 
taking  a  stand  upon  some  questions.  He  especially 
emphasized  his  simplicity  and  strength  of  character, 
and  the  qualities  of  his  style,  "  argumentative, 
logical  and  spirited  with  quaint  humor  and  sinewy 
sententiousness. "  From  Mrs.  Lincoln  Sumner  re 
ceived  a  most  appreciative  message,  and  Eobert  T. 
Lincoln  wrote  to  him  that  of  all  the  many  eulogies 
that  had  boen  delivered,  he  had  seen  none  which  so 
well  as  Sumner' s  expressed  "  what  all  who  knew  my 
father  feel,  but  cannot  say." 


CHAPTEE  XV 

JOHNSON   AND   KECONSTKUCTION 

AT  the  beginning  of  the  first  war  session  of  Con 
gress  Simmer  had  gone  out  of  his  way  to  express 
great  respect  for  Andrew  Johnson,  the  loyal  senator 
from  Tennessee,  and  despite  the  disgraceful  features 
which  had  attended  Johnson's  inauguration  as  Vice- 
President,  Sumner' s  early  impressions  of  him  in  the 
office  now  thrust  upon  him  were  distinctly  favorable. 
He  had  occasion  to  call  upon  him  on  business  a  few 
hours  before  his  taking  the  oath  of  office ;  and  he  forth 
with  began  to  exert  all  possible  pressure  to  induce 
Johnson  to  endorse  his  reconstruction  policy.  A 
week  from  the  day  of  Lincoln's  assassination,  Chief 
Justice  Chase  and  Sumner  together  called  upon  the 
new  Executive  to  urge  him  to  favor  negro  suffrage. 
Of  this  interview  Sumner  wrote  to  Lieber  :  u  I  was 
charmed  by  his  sympathy,  which  was  entirely  dif 
ferent  from  his  predecessor's.  .  .  .  Our  late 
President  accepted  the  principle,  but  hesitated  in 
the  application.  .  .  .  Our  new  President  ac 
cepts  the  principle  and  the  application.  .  .  . 
Both  of  us  left  him  light-hearted."  '  Meantime  the 
question  had  risen  in  a  conference  between  Stanton 
and  some  leading  members  of  the  two  Houses,  at 
'May  2,  1865.  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  243. 


296  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

which  Sumner  had  insisted  that  the  negro's  right  to 
vote  was  "  the  essence, — the  great  essential  j  .  .  . 
unless  the  black  man  has  the  right  to  vote,  his  free 
dom  is  mockery."  It  soon  arose  also  at  a  cabinet 
meeting,  where,  in  the  absence  of  Seward,  the  mem 
bers  were  evenly  divided  upon  the  issue  ;  the  Presi 
dent  did  not  commit  himself.  When  Sumner  went 
to  Boston  to  pronounce  the  eulogy  upon  Lincoln,  he 
felt  confident  that  Johnson's  influence  would  be 
thrown  in  favor  of  full  suffrage  rights  for  the  blacks, 
and  that  none  of  the  seceded  states  would  be  precip 
itated  back  into  the  Union  without  passing  through 
a  term  of  probation.  But  ten  days  had  not  passed 
before  the  President  issued  a  proclamation  of 
amnesty,  followed  by  another,  providing  for  the  re 
construction  of  North  Carolina  and  excluding  ne 
groes  from  the  suffrage  in  that  state.1  Forthwith 
other  proclamations  affirmed  the  steps  already  taken 
by  Lincoln  as  to  Louisiana,  Arkansas  and  Tennessee, 
and  provided  for  the  reconstruction  of  the  rest  of 
the  seceded  states. 

It  is  not  necessary  here  to  canvass  the  influences 
which  led  to  this  "political  somersault."  It  was  a 
bitter  disappointment  to  Sumner  and  other  radicals. 
Thaddeus  Stevens  had  already  taken  alarm  at 
Johnson's  proclamation  of  May  9th,  recognizing  the 
Pierpont  government  of  Virginia  ;  he  now  wrote  to 
Sumner  :  "Is  there  no  way  to  arrest  the  insane 

1  This  proclamation  of  May  29th  was  issued  two  days  before 
Simmer's  eulogy  on  Lincoln,  and  doubtless  this  fact  accounts 
for  some  of  his  digressions. 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     297 

course  of  tlie  President  in  reorganization  !  "  and  as 
serted  that  he  had  sent  him  two  letters,  urging  him 
to  * '  stay  his  hand  till  Congress  meets. ' '  Wade  went 
to  Washington  to  beg  Johnson  to  convene  Congress, 
but  soon  reported  to  Sumner  that  he  had  been  un 
able  to  divert  the  President  from  the  policy  on  which 
he  was  resolved.1 

During  the  summer  months  these  acts  of  Johnson 
apparently  awakened  little  disapproval,  still  less 
apprehension,  among  the  people  of  the  North. 
They  seemed  a  consistent  carrying  forward  of  am 
nesty  and  reconstruction,  as  begun  by  Lincoln.  But 
the  radical  leaders,  who  had  viewed  with  alarm  the 
first  steps  taken  by  Lincoln,  were  now  aghast  at  the 
pace  Johnson  was  attaining.  "If  something  is  not 
done,  the  President  will  be  crowned  King  before 
Congress  meets,"  Wade  wrote  to  Sumner,  and  later  : 
"The  danger  is  that  so  much  success  will  reconcile 
the  people  to  almost  anything."  He  could  foresee 
no  other  result  of  the  President's  course  than  the 
consigning  of  "  the  great  Union  or  Republican  party, 
bound  hand  and  foot,  to  the  tender  mercies  of  the 
rebels  we  have  so  lately  conquered  in  the  field  and 
their  Copperhead  allies  of  the  North."  2 

Sunnier  was  not  so  disheartened,  though  he  con 
fessed  to  Bright  his  disappointment  that  the  radicals 
in  the  cabinet  had  deserted  "the  good  cause."  8  He 


Works,  Vol.  IX,  p.  480. 
'Letter  to  Sumner,  July  29th.     Sumner  Coir.  MS.,  Harvard 
Library. 
3 Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  250,  255. 


298  CHABLES  SUMNER 

straightway  set  about  organizing  public  opinion. 
Through  personal  correspondence,  letters  to  the 
press,  magazine  articles  and  interviews  with  public^ 
men,  he  sought  to  further  the  measures  to  which  he 
was  ardently  devoted.  Seward,  Welles  and  McCul- 
loch  approved  Johnson's  policies.  In  the  cabinet 
no  man  was  prepared  to  force  equal  suffrage  for  the 
negro  as  an  out-and-out  issue  with  the  President ; 
and  of  the  senators  B.  Gratz  Brown  was  the  only 
one  who  during  the  summer  declared  himself  ready 
without  reserve  to  follow  Sumner's  lead  upon  that 
point.  Of  the  members  of  the  House,  three  (Bout- 
well,  Julian  and  Garfield)  put  themselves  on  record 
before  the  public  as  in  favor  of  negro  suffrage, 
but  Dawes,  soon  to  follow  Sumner  in  the  Senate,  now 
defended  Johnson's  course,  vigorously  challenging 
the  constitutionality  of  any  equal- suffrage  require 
ment  which  Congress  might  attempt  to  force  as  a 
condition  of  reconstruction.  Hardly  any  other  pub 
lic  man  or  editor  of  prominence  looked  with  favor 
upon  Sumner's  programme,  even  Greeley,  who  ad 
vocated  negro  suffrage  as  just  and  politic,  being  un 
willing  to  affront  the  President  by  rigidly  insisting 
upon  it.  But  clearer  than  ever  stood  the  fact  that, 
in  the  face  of  every  opposition,  Sumner  was  inexor 
ably  insistent  that  before  a  seceded  state  should  be 
restored  to  normal  relations  in  the  Union,  it  must 
grant  full  and  equal  suffrage  rights  to  the  negro. 
To  Lieber  Sumner  acknowledged  that  all  his  first  im 
pressions  were  in  favor  of  the  re?  ding  and  writing 
test,  but  that  he  had  come  to  regard  this  as  imprac- 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     L>99 

ticable,  since  any  such  test  would  have  to  apply  to 
whites  and  blacks  alike,  aud  it  would  be  impossible 
to  get  votes  of  Cougress  to  disfranchise  men  who 
were  already  voters,  as  such  a  test  would  inevitably 
do.  "Besides,"  he  added,  "  there  are  very  intelli 
gent  persons,  especially  among  the  freedmen,  who 
cannot  read  or  write.  But  we  need  the  votes  of  all, 
aud  cannot  afford  to  wait."  1 

At  the  Massachusetts  state  Republican  conven 
tion,  on  September  14th,  Sumuer  took  the  chair. 
He  spoke  with  intense  earnestness,  urging  "the 
right  of  the  colored  race  to  equality  in  suffrage  as 
in  all  other  things,  both  for  its  own  protection  and 
for  the  safety  of  the  country, — to  be  maintained  by 
Congress  as  a  condition  in  the  restoration  of  the 
rebel  states,  and  irrevocably  secured  by  an  amend 
ment  of  the  Constitution  forbidding  any  exclusion 
on  account  of  race  or  color," — one  of  the  earliest 
suggestions  of  what  was  to  become  the  Fifteenth 
Amendment.  The  Massachusetts  Republicans  en 
dorsed  Sumner's  programme,  but  this  stand  was 
taken  by  the  party  in  only  three  other  states 
(Vermont,  Iowa  and  Minnesota),  although  before 
Congress  assembled  there  was  evidence  of  growth 
of  popular  sentim_ent  in  its  favor.  Some  of  the 
constitutions  adopted)  and  the  laws  passed  in  1865 
in  the  seceded  states  under  warrant  of  Johnson's 
proclamations,  especially  Mississippi's  refusal  to 
ratify  the  Thirteenth  Amendment  and  her  harsh 
legislation  with  reference  to  the  freedmen,  afforded 
1  Letter  of  August  14,  1865.  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  256. 


300  CHARLES  SUMNER 

ample  justification  to  a  man  of  Simmer's  mode  of 
thought  for  the  conviction  that  their  reconstruction 
was  premature  and  in  the  wrong  hands  j  for  while, 
before  Congress  met,  four  of  the  states  had  annulled 
the  ordinances  of  secession  and  ratified  the  emanci 
pating  Amendment,  they  not  only  confined  the 
suffrage  to  white  citizens  but  passed  a  variety  of  acts 
discriminating  against  the  freedmen  with  the 
tendency  and  effect  of  reducing  them  to  virtual 
peonage.  The  President  himself  was  so  impressed 
by  the  growing  belief  that  mere  emancipation 
would  leave  the  freedmen  defenseless,  that  in  his 
circular  to  the  provisional  governors  he  suggested 
that  the  ballot  be  given  to  all  freedmen  "who  can 
read  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and 
write  their  names,  and  also  to  those  who  own  real 
estate  valued  at  not  less  than  two  hundred  and  fifty 
dollars  and  pay  taxes  thereon."  But  that  the  sug 
gestion  came  from  the  politician  rather  than  from 
the  statesman  or  philanthropist  is  clear  from  his 
message  to  the  Mississippi  governor  :  "  I  hope  and 
trust  that  your  convention  will  do  this,  and  as  a 
consequence  the  radicals,  who  are  wild  upon  negro 
franchise,  will  be  completely  foiled  in  their  attempt 
to  keep  the  Southern  states  from  renewing  their  re 
lations  to  the  Union  by  not  accepting  their  senators 
and  representatives."  1 

On    the    Saturday    evening    before    the    session 
opened,  Sumner  had  a  long  interview  with  John- 

1  Letter  to  W.  L.  Sharkey,  Aug.  15,  1306.     Elaine,  Vol.  II, 
p.  81. 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     301 

son,  and  found  him  "  harsh,  petulant  and  unrea 
sonable."  *  There  was  so  little  basis  for  common 
understanding  that  Sumner  left  him  convinced 
uthat  the  President's  whole  soul  was  set  as  a  flint 
against  the  good  cause,  and  that  by  the  assassination 
of  Abraham  Lincoln  the  rebellion  had  vaulted  into 
the  presidential  chair."  As  he  later  wrote  to 
Bright,  "  He  is  indocile,  obstinate,  perverse,  im 
penetrable,  and  hates  the  education  and  civilization 
of  New  England."  They  parted  never  again  to 
meet  on  friendly  terms.  On  the  very  first  day  of 
the  session,  as  soon  as  he  could  get  the  floor,  Suin- 
ner  introduced  a  series  of  ten  resolutions,  covering 
the  whole  field  of  reconstruction.  His  object  was 
to  forestall  the  President,  whose  message  had  not 
yet  been  presented,  and  to  form  public  opinion. 
The  condition  which  he  laid  down  as  of  fundamental 
importance  was  the  maintenance  by  Congress  of 
absolute  political  and  civic  equality  of  all  citizens, 
white  or  black.  He  based  this  upon  the  constitu 
tional  duty  to  guarantee  to  every  state  a  republican 
form  of  government.  It  was  no  longer  possible  to 
fail  to  see  the  vast  proportions  of  the  problems  in 
volved. 

In  the  House  Stevens  was  not  less  alert.  Under 
his  prompting,  on  the  first  day  of  the  session,  the 
clerk  admitted  to  the  roll  of  members-elect  none  of 
the  men  who  had  been  chosen  from  the  states  which 
had  seceded,  and  refused  to  listen  to  their  protests 
or  to  entertain  motions  directing  that  the  names  of 

1  Works,  Vol.  XI,  pp.  24,  25. 


302  CHAKLES  SUMNEB 

the  two  Tennessee  members-elect  be  added.  The 
work  of  organization  was  rushed  through,  and  un 
der  suspension  of  the  rules  Stevens  then  introduced 
a  resolution  providing  for  the  appointment  of  a 
joint  committee  of  nine  from  the  House  and  six 
from  the  Senate  to  investigate  the  condition  of  the 
states  which  had  been  in  rebellion  l  i  and  to  report 
whether  they  or  any  of  them  are  entitled  to  be 
represented  in  either  House."  '  Protest  was  made 
as  to  the  impropriety  of  acting  upon  such  a  motion 
without  awaiting  the  President's  message,  but  it 
was  nevertheless  passed  by  a  vote  of  nearly  four  to 
one  and  the  committee  was  constituted  with  Stevens 
as  chairman  of  the  House  committee  and  Fesseuden 
of  the  Senate  committee,  and  also  of  the  joint  com 
mittee. 

Johnson's  first  message  was  an  unexpectedly 
statesmanlike  paper,  now  known  to  have  been 
written  by  George  Bancroft.2  It  stated  the  steps 

1The  surprising  fact  that  Sumner  and  Stevens,  who  at  first 
had  but  a  small  following,  were  soon  dictating  the  congressional 
programme  of  reconstruction  is  well  discussed  by  W.  A.  Dun 
ning  in  Essays  on  the  Civil  War  and  Reconstruction,  and  in  Re 
construction,  Political  and  Economic,  p.  52  :  "It  was  to  the 
esprit  de  corps  of  the  legislature,  as  against  the  overgrown  pre 
tensions  of  the  executive,  that  the  most  effective  appeals  were 
made  by  the  radical  leaders,  Stevens  and  Sumner.  These  men 
could  not  have  carried  with  them  a  majority  of  either  House — 
probably  not  a  majority  of  the  non-Democratic  members  in 
either — for  a  proposition  to  discard  the  President's  plan;  but 
for  a  proposition  to  hold  it  in  abeyance  till  Congress  could 
formulate  an  independent  judgment  on  the  question  involved 
it  was  easy  to  win  a  decisive  majority." 

2 Paper  by  W.  A.  Dunning,  Mass.  H'st.  Soc.  Proc.,  Nov., 
1905. 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     3(tt 

which  the  President  had  taken  in  his  effort  uto  re 
store  the  rightful  energy  of  the  general  government 
and  of  the  states"  and  intimated  that  after  the 
states  lately  in  revolt  had  adopted  the  Thirteenth 
Amendment  it  would  "remain  for  the  states  whose 
powers  have  been  so  long  in  abeyance  to  resume 
their  places  in  the  two  branches  of  the  national 
legislature,  and  thereby  complete  the  work  of 
restoration."  He  dwelt  upon  the  fact  that  the 
Constitution  did  not  assume  to  prescribe  suffrage 
conditions  within  the  states,  and  declared  that  a 
concession  of  the  elective  franchise  to  the  freedmen 
by  the  act  of  the  President  would  be  an  entirely  un 
warranted  departure  from  precedent  and  from  the 
spirit  of  the  Constitution.1 

In  both  bodies  the  debates  soon  brought  clearly 
into  view  a  wide-spread  opposition  to  the  President. 
On  motion  of  Sumuer  there  were  sent  to  the  Senate 
the  reports  of  Carl  Schurz  and  of  General  Grant  on 
conditions  in  the  Southern  states.  Schurz' s  report 
was  the  result  of  a  three  months'  inspection,  made 
under  the  special  commission  of  Johnson.  It  de 
clared  that  in  general  he  found  in  the  South  "  an 
entire  absence  of  that  national  spirit  which  forms 
the  basis  of  true  loyalty  and  patriotism, "  and  he 
therefore  urged  that  negro  suffrage  be  required  as  a 
condition  of  reconstruction  in  those  states.  Such 
statements  and  recommendations  were  utterly  dis 
tasteful  to  Johnson  in  his  present  mood,  and  accord - 

1  Dec.  4, 1865.  Messages  and  Papers  of  the  Presidents,  Vol.  VI, 
pp.  353-371. 


304  CHARLES  SUMMER 

ingly  his  message  of  transmittal  made  only  formal 
reference  to  this  report,  but  laid  emphasis  upon  that 
of  General  Grant,  who  had  spent  only  four  or  five 
days  in  the  South  on  an  inspection  tour,  the  object 
of  which  was  primarily  military,  and  who  reported 
that  ' l  the  mass  of  thinking  men  of  the  South  accept 
the  present  situation  of  affairs  in  good  faith." 
Sunnier  denounced  the  message  as  u  like  the  white 
washing  message  of  Franklin  Pierce  with  reference 
to  the  enormities  in  Kansas'^  he  characterized 
Grant's  report  as  "hasty,"  while  that  of  Schurz 
was  u  accurate,  authentic,  and  most  authoritative." 
With  abundance  of  detail  from  reliable  sources,  he 
then  set  forth  acts  and  laws  of  each  of  the  seceded 
states  which  showed,  so  he  asserted,  a  lack  of  loyalty 
or  a  determination  to  discriminate  against  the  freed- 
men.1  He  called  for  information  in  regard  to  the 
President's  appointments  in  the  South,  and  the 
acts  of  Southern  conventions,  and  later  repeatedly 
brought  to  the  attention  of  the  Senate  appointments 
of  men  whom  the  oath  of  loyalty  should  have  de 
barred. 

Both  in  Congress  and  among  the  people  there 
was  great  reluctance  to  come  to  an  open  breach  with 
the  President.  After  four  years  of  strife,  business 
interests  wanted  a  speedy  return  to  normal  condi 
tions.  The  Republican  party  held  power  by  a  very 
narrow  margin,  and  it  was  feared  that  factional  dis 
cord  might  put  the  government  into  the  hands  of 

1  For  a  more  judicious  verdict  upon  the  spirit  of  these  laws  see 
Rhodes,  Vol.  V,  pp.  556-557,  arid  citations  in  notes. 


JOHNSON  AND  REGOSSTBUCTION     305 

the  Democrats,  and  endanger  hard-won  fruits  of  the 
war.  But  when  Johnson  on  February  19th  vetoed 
the  bill  to  enlarge  the  powers  of  the  Freedmen's 
Bureau,  and  denounced  Sumuer  and  other  Kepub- 
licau  leaders  as  on  a  par  with  Davis,  Slidell  and 
Tooinbs — a  performance  which  by  practically  unani 
mous  vote  the  Massachusetts  legislature  declared  to 
be  "  without  the  shadow  of  justification  or  defense  " 
—patience  ceased  to  be  a  virtue.  His  next  two 
vetoes  were  promptly  overridden  by  Congress.  l 

During  this  session  much  time  was  taken  up  by 
debates  over  the  Fourteenth  Amendment.  The 
most  disputed  feature  was  the  clause  relating  to 
representation.  As  it  came  up  from  the  House  it 
provided  that  "  whenever  the  elective  franchise 
shall  be  denied  or  abridged  in  any  state  on  account 
of  race  or  color,  the  persons  therein  of  such  race  or 
color  shall  be  excluded  from  the  basis  of  representa 
tion.  "  It  was  estimated  that  if  all  the  colored  peo 
ple  in  the  Southern  states  were  excluded,  it  would 
reduce  their  representation  from  eighty-three  to 
thirty-five,  and  many  men  placed  great  reliance 
upon  this  as  the  inducement  which  would  lead  the 
South  to  extend  the  suffrage  to  negroes.  Sumuer, 
however,  denounced  it  as  "  another  compromise 
with  human  rights"  and  as  a  recognition  of  the 
right  of  states  to  make  suffrage  discriminations 
* '  on  account  of  race  and  color. "  In  a  speech  of  four 
hours  he  traversed  thoroughly  not  only  the  question 

1  The  Civil  Rights  Bill  and  the  second  Freedmen's  Bureau 
Bill. 


306  CHARLES  SUMNER 

before  the  Senate,  but  the  whole  ground  of  his  reso 
lutions  on  reconstruction. 1  He  argued  that  for  de 
termining  the  status  of  the  Negro,  Congress  had 
full  competence  derived  from  the  war  power,  from 
the  clause  of  the  Thirteenth  Amendment  authori 
zing  Congress  to  enforce  emancipation  by  appropriate 
legislation,  and  from  the  constitutional  duty  as  well 
as  power  to  "  guarantee  to  every  state  a  republican 
form  of  government."  Upon  this  last  point  he  laid 
great  stress.  His  earnestness  and  moral  elevation 
made  a  deep  impression.  His  arraignment  of  the 
caste  spirit  involved  in  the  suffrage  restrictions 
which  the  proposed  amendment  would  tolerate  put 
its  advocates  on  the  defensive.  But  among  men  of 
legal  training  and  judicial  mind  he  won  few  con 
verts  to  his  dictum,  u  Whatever  is  required  for  the 
national  defense  is  constitutional."  For  the  import 
of  "a  republican  form  of  government"  he  studied 
not  the  opinions  of  the  framers  of  the  Constitution 
but  his  own  inner  consciousness  and  political  ideals. 
The  debate  continued  with  a  good  deal  of  bitterness 
for  five  or  six  weeks,  during  which  a  test  vote  on  an 
amendment  forbidding  any  discrimination  as  to  race 
or  color  received  but  ten  votes  in  its  favor.  By  the 
leaders  of  the  Committee  on  Reconstruction  Sumner 
was  held  in  large  part  responsible  for  the  failure  of 
the  amendment  in  the  Senate. 2  Fessendeu  attacked 

1  February  5,  1866.  Works,  Vol.  X,  pp.  119-237.  This 
speech  fills  forty-one  columns  of  the  Congressional  Globe! 

9  "  When  the  measure  [the  proposed  Fourteenth  Amendment] 
came  before  the  Senate,  Mr.  Sumner  opposed  its  passage  and 
alleged  that  we  proposed  to  barter  the  right  of  the  negroes  to 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     307 

him  with  bitter  personalities,  while  Stevens  found 
relief  for  his  resentment  in  declaring  that  the 
amendment  had  been  "slaughtered  by  a  puerile 
and  pedantic  criticism,  by  a  perversion  of  philo 
logical  definition"  and  by  the  "united  forces  of 
self-righteous  Republicans  and  unrighteous  Copper 
heads."  1  March  12th  Sumner  himself  presented  a 
form  of  constitutional  amendment,  the  representa 
tive  feature  of  which  closely  resembled  that  which 
was  soon  to  be  introduced  by  the  Committee  on  Re 
construction,  and  which  late  in  the  session,  with 
Sumner's  approval,  passed  the  Senate,  and  also  the 

vote  for  diminished  representation  on  the  part  of  the  old  slave 
states  in  the  House  and  in  the  electoral  college  ;  while  in  truth 
the  loss  of  representation  was  imposed  as  a  penalty  upon  any 
state  that  should  deprive  any  class  of  its  adult  male  citizens  of 
the  right  to  vote.  Upon  this  allegation  of  Mr.  Sumuer  the 
resolution  was  defeated  in  the  Senate."  This  brought  upon 
him  severe  criticisms.  "  These  criticisms  affected  Mr.  Sunnier 
deeply  and  he  then  devoted  himself  to  the  preparation  of  an 
amendment  which  he  could  approve.  While  he  was  engaged  in 
that  work  I  called  upon  him  and  he  read  seventeen  drafts  of  a 
proposition  not  one  of  which  was  entirely  satisfactory  to  him 
self,  and  not  one  of  which  would  have  been  accepted  by  Con 
gress  or  the  country.  The  difficulty  was  in  the  situation. 
Upon  the  return  of  the  seceded  states,  their  representation 
would  be  increased  nearly  forty  votes  in  the  House  and  in  the 
electoral  college,  while  the  voting  force  would  remain  in  the 
white  population.  The  injustice  of  such  a  condition  was  ap 
parent,  and  there  were  only  two  possible  remedies.  One  was 
to  extend  the  franchise  to  the  blacks.  The  country — the  loyal 
states— were  not  then  ready  for  the  measure.  The  alternative 
was  to  cut  off  the  representation  from  states  that  denied  the 
elective  franchise  to  any  class  of  adult  male  citizens.  Finally 
Mr.  Sumner  was  compelled  to  accept  the  alternative.  Some 
change  of  phraseology  was  made,  and  Mr.  Sumner  gave  a  re 
luctant  vote  for  the  resolution." — G.  S.  Boutwell,  Sixty  Years 
of  Public  Life,  Vol.  II,  p.  42. 
1  Congressional  Globe,  p.  2459. 


308  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

House,  aud  presently  was  ratified  by  the  states. 
Yet  the  power  to  discriminate  in  the  suffrage  on 
account  of  race  or  color,  so  long  and  fiercely  de 
bated  and  still  left  possible  in  the  final  form  of  the 
Fourteenth  Amendment,  was  soon  to  be  taken  away 
by  the  Fifteenth  Amendment. l 

At  this  session  Sumner  accepted  an  appointment 
to  the  Committee  on  the  District  of  Columbia,  with 
the  avowed  purpose  of  so  changing  its  personnel  as 
to  secure  a  report  favorable  to  equal  suffrage  within 
the  District.  For  this  he  argued  with  great  ear 
nestness  as  a  matter  of  principle  and  of  precedent, 
but  it  did  not  become  a  law  at  this  session. 

Sumner  did  his  utmost  to  impose  the  condition  of 
equal  suffrage  without  race  or  color  discrimination 
in  the  acts  for  the  admission  of  Colorado  and  Ne- 
braska — both  of  which  measures  were  vetoed 2  — and 


1  The  motives  and  aims  of  those  who  drafted  and  ratified  this 
Amendment  are  presented  comprehensively  in   The  Adoption  of 
the  Fourteenth  Amendment,  by  Horace  E.  Flack.     Mr.  Rhodes 
(Vol.   V,  pp.  602-610)  advances  cogent  reasons  for  his  belief 
that  the  Southern  states  ought  promptly  to  have  accepted  what 
now   became    the    congressional   plan   of   reconstruction, — the 
Johnson    conditions    supplemented    by   the  adoption   of  this 
Amendment.     They  would  thus  have  saved  themselves  from  far 
more  galling  exactions. 

2  It  was  by  a  "pocket  veto"  that   this  Nebraska  bill  was 
killed.     It  was  said  that  there  were  at  the  time  not  more  than 
fifty  negroes  in  Nebraska,  aud  Wade  protested  against   the  ex 
clusion  of  the  would-be  state  because  of  '*  a  mere  technicality." 
Sumner  rejoined  :  uln  other  days  we  all  joined  in  saying  '  No 
more  slave  states  ! '     I  now  insist  upon  another  cry,  'No  more 
states   with    the   word  white   in    their   Constitutions!''      Con 
gressional  Globe,  2d  Session,  39th  Cong.,  «.  124.     It  was  after 
Sumner's  success  in   this  matter  that  (jerrit  Smith   wrote   to 
him  :    "I  thank  you  and  I  thank  God  that  neither  Nebraska 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     309 

for  the  reconstruction  of  Tennessee,  his  support 
from  other  senators  varying  from  three  to  seven. 
Yet  only  two  years  later  he  was  to  be  upheld  by  the 
entire  Republican  vote  in  his  contention  as  to  the 
necessity  and  effect  of  this  condition,  and  it.  was 
then  to  be  applied  to  five  of  the  reconstructed  states. 
At  this  time  an  effort  was  made  by  the  leaders  of 
the  woman's  suffrage  movement  to  secure  Suniuer's 
potent  advocacy  for  their  cause,  but  he  declined  to 
be  drawn  into  that  controversy  while  other  and 
more  important  issues  were  demanding  solution. 

At  this  time  strong  pressure  was  exerted  to  secure 
the  modification  of  the  law  as  to  jurors  so  as  to 
make  easy  the  trial  and  conviction  of  Jefferson 
Davis.  It  was  Sumner's  hope  that  Davis  would  not 
be  brought  to  trial  ;  in  any  event  he  insisted  that 
such  a  case  "  should  be  approached  carefully,  most 
discreetly,  and  with  absolute  reference  to  the  exist 
ing  law  of  the  land." 

Another  subject  upon  which  popular  feeling  was 
much  wrought  up  was  retaliation  against  England 
for  her  breaches  of  neutrality  during  the  war.  The 
British  government  still  refused  to  acknowledge  any 
wrongs  on  its  part  in  connection  with  the  Confeder 
ate  cruisers,  built  in  British  ports,  which  had 
wrought  havoc  upon  American  shipping.  Accord 
ingly  the  House  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs  iu- 


nor  Colorado  is  yet  a  state,  and  I  trust  that  neither  will  be  a 
state  so  long  as  they  continue  to  insult  Heaven  and  earth  with 
their  infamous  Caste  Constitutions."  Rumner  Corr.,  Harvard 
Library.  Deu.  26,  1866. 


310  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

troduced  a  bill  for  modifyiog  the  neutrality  acts  so 
as  to  permit  American  citizens  to  sell  ships  to  either 
belligerent  in  a  war  when  the  United  States  should 
be  a  neutral,  and  repealing  the  prohibition  upon 
Americans'  fitting  out  expeditious  against  a  coun 
try  with  which  the  United  States  was  at  peace. 
This  bill  passed  the  House  by  a  unanimous  vote. 
Probably  no  man  in  public  life  rated  as  more 
grievous  the  injury  which  England's  negligence  had 
inflicted  upon  the  United  States  than  did  Sumner, 
yet  he  insisted  that  "our  own  country  should  be 
kept  firm  and  constant  in  the  attitude  of  justice." 
This  House  measure  reached  the  Senate  Friday 
afternoon.  It  had  already  been  voted  that  the  ses 
sion  should  end  at  four  o'clock  on  the  following 
day.  The  bill  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Relations,  and  Sumner  determined  that  it 
should  not  be  acted  upon.  The  hotheads  were  bound 
to  call  it  up,  but  Sumner  came  to  the  evening  ses 
sion  armed  with  a  formidable  array  of  books  and 
announced  to  those  near  him  that  he  was  "  good  for 
five  hours  at  least."  From  seven  in  the  evening  till 
seven  in  the  morning  he  kept  his  vigil.  Toward 
noon  of  the  final  day  the  motion  was  made  to  take 
up  the  bill,  but  Sumner  instantly  took  the  floor,  an 
nouncing  that  he  would  speak  all  the  remainder  of 
the  session,  if  necessary,  to  bring  about  its  defeat. 
The  advocates  of  the  measure  therefore  gave  up  the 
fight.  The  responsibility  was  a  grave  one,  but  he 
was  ready  thus  single-handed  to  oppose  what  he 
deemed  an  injustice,  even  though  it  were  embodied 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     311 

in  a  bill  which  was  heartily  approved  by  the  peo 
ple,  which  had  passed  the  House  by  a  unanimous 
vote,  and  which  was  sure  to  pass  the  Senate  if  for  a 
single  moment  he  should  relax  his  resistance.1 

During  this  session  was  passed  a  most  useful 
measure  which  Sumner  had  been  the  first  to  pro 
pose  in  his  earliest  days  in  the  Senate,  fifteen  years 
before, — a  bill  for  the  revision  and  codification  of 
the  statutes  of  the  United  States.  His  other  legis 
lative  interests  were  very  varied.  He  found  time 
to  advocate  international  copyright,  the  raising  of 
the  rank  of  our  representatives  at  foreign  courts, 
the  adoption  of  the  metric  system,  etc.  His  ex 
cessive  labors  brought  serious  reminders  of  the 
illness  which  had  followed  the  Brooks  assault, 
and  he  was  obliged  to  submit  to  medical  treatment 
and  make  a  trip  to  the  White  Mountains  for  his 
health. 

It  was  in  June  of  this  year  that  Sumner' s  mother 
died.  She  had  been  gradually  failing,  and  the  sum 
mons  which  called  him  from  the  Senate  to  her  side 
was  not  unexpected.  She  had  been  proud  of  her 
famous  son,  and  he  felt  a  genuine  affection  for  her. 
All  the  members  of  his  family,  with  the  exception 
of  one  married  sister,  were  now  dead.  A  few 
months  later  Sumner  made  an  ill-advised  marriage 
which  led  only  to  disappointment  and  divorce. 
Bereavement,  the  break-up  of  his  Boston  home  and 

1  A  writer  in  the  Pall  Mall  Gazette  declared  :  "No  other  man 
could  have  arrested  by  his  single  voice  a  measure  unanimously 
passed  by  the  House."  December  26,  1866.  Pierce,  Vol.  IV, 
p.  292. 


/ 


312  CHAELES  SUMMER 

the  wreck  of  his  own  long-deferred  hopes  of  domestic 
joys,  all  coming  upon  Sumner  in  a  single  year,  aged 
him  greatly.  His  health  was  impaired,  and  the 
severe  contests  of  the  coming  years  found  him  more 
stern  and  less  tolerant  of  opposition  than  in  the 
early  part  of  his  career. 

The  recess  did  not  narrow  the  breach  between  the 
President  and  Congress.  During  the  summer  John 
son  had  " swung  round  the  circle"  on  a  political 
tour,  and  in  his  speeches  had  repeatedly  referred  to 
Congress  in  most  contemptuous  terms  as  "  hanging 
upon  the  verge  of  the  government,  as  it  were ;  a 
body  called,  or  which  assumes  to  be,  the  Congress  of 
the  United  States,  while,  in  fact,  it  is  a  Congress  of 
only  a  part  of  the  United  States. ' '  Shortly  after  the 
completion  of  this  unprecedented  tour,  Sumner  de 
livered  in  Boston  an  address  on  "The  One  Man 
Power  vs.  Congress."  It  was  a  scathing  indict 
ment  of  the  President,  charging  him  with  having 
done  more  mischief,  in  the  same  space  of  time,  than 
any  other  ruler  in  all  history.  He  frankly  at 
tributed  Johnson's  change  of  attitude  toward  recon 
struction  to  defects  in  his  character  and  to  the  in 
fluence  of  unwise  counselors,  among  whom  he  did 
not  hesitate  to  specify  Seward.  The  fall  elections 
showed  that  the  country  at  large  was  in  pronounced 
opposition  to  the  President,  and  on  the  very  first  day 
of  the  session  a  bill  was  introduced  into  the  Senate 
' '  to  regulate  the  tenure  of  offices. ' '  It  was  under  de 
bate  for  several  weeks.  Sunnier  u^ged  its  extension 
to  a  large  number  of  officers  whose  appointment  hith 


JOHNSOX  AND  RECON8TBUCTION     313 

erto  liiid  not  required  confirmation  by  the  Seriate. 
The  bill  was  vetoed  by  Johnson,  but  on  the  same 
day  it  was  passed  over  his  veto  by  both  houses  by 
votes  of  nearly  three  to  one.  Its  intention  was  to 
strip  the  President  of  much  of  his  power.  The  de 
bates  upon  it  aroused  intense  feeling.  Surnner  de 
nounced  Johnson  as  "  utterly  unprincipled  and 
wicked,"  "the  author  of  incalculable  woe  to  his 
country,"  "  the  successor  of  Jefferson  Davis,  in  the 
spirit  by  which  he  is  governed  and  in  the  mischief 
he  is  inflicting  on  his  country."  The  possibility  of 
an  impeachment  was  constantly  in  mind,  and  a 
Maryland  senator  declared  that  such  language 
from  Sumner  ought  to  disqualify  him  from  acting  as 
a  judge  in  the  event  of  an  impeachment  trial.1 

The  equal  suffrage  issue  was  now  to  be  fought 
through  to  the  end.  In  the  first  month  a  bill  for 
equal  suffrage  in  the  District  of  Columbia  was  car 
ried,  and  passed  over  the  President's  veto.2  Then 
the  bill  for  the  admission  of  Nebraska  was  again 


1  Dewitt,  Impeachment  and  Trial  of  Andrew  Johnson,  pp.  189, 
191,  219,  229,  231. 

2  As  early  as  1864  Sumner  had  sought  to  ensure  equal  suffrage 
iu  the  District  of  Columbia.     McPherson,  p.  241.     By  the  law 
of  1878  all  participation  of  residents  of  the  District  in  electing 
their  local  government  was  brought  to  an  end  and  the  present 
system  of  government   by  an   appointed   commission  was  in 
stituted.     It  is  said  that  this  change   (which  may  well  have 
been  inevitable,  in  order  to  secure  national  control  over  the  seat 
of   the  national  government)  was  hastened  by  the  melancholy 
results  of  the  experiment  of  submitting  the  government  of  the 
District  to  an  electorate  consisting  largely  of  illiterate  negroes. 
Corruption  was  rife  and  the  District  was  brought  to  the  verge  of 
bankruptcy. 


314  CHAKLES  SUMNER 

urged,  and  promptly  Stunner's  supporter  of  the 
previous  session  moved  an  amendment  requiring 
equal  suffrage.  Objections  were  strongly  set  forth, 
—in  particular,  that  such  a  condition  could  be  im 
posed  only  on  states  lately  in  rebellion,  and  that  this 
would  require  in  Nebraska  a  restriction  not  found  in 
many  states  already  in  the  Union.  Sumner  argued 
against  any  exclusion  as  "  odious  and  offensive," 
and  exerted  himself  to  arouse  popular  sentiment 
outside  the  Senate  which  might  affect  senators' 
votes.  The  measure  received  a  majority  of  two  on 
a  test  vote,  and  secured  a  two-thirds  vote  when 
vetoed.  The  winning  of  equal  suffrage  in  a  state 
where  reconstruction  issues  were  not  involved  was  a 
veritable  triumph  for  Sumner.  The  tide  had 
turned :  the  next  day,  without  debate,  a  bill  was 
passed  prohibiting  in  the  territories  any  suffrage 
discrimination  on  account  of  race  or  color,  and  this 
became  a  law  without  the  President's  signature. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  Sumner  never  was 
satisfied  with  the  form  of  the  Fourteenth  Amend 
ment,  which  irnpliedly  allowed  suffrage  discrimina 
tions  on  account  of  race  or  color  under  penalty  of  u 
proportionate  loss  of  representation.  He  was,  there 
fore,  not  at  all  disposed  to  take  the  position  of  most 
of  his  Republican  colleagues,  that  if  the  Johnson 
legislatures  in  the  seceded  states  would  ratify  this 
amendment,  the  restoration  of  those  states  to  normal 
relations  with  the  Union  would  be  complete.  Sum 
ner  insisted  that  formal  declaration  should  be  made 
that  this  amendment  "is  in  no  respect  an  offer, 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     315 

which,  if  accepted  by  them,  will  bind  Congress  to 
receive  them  back.  In  one  word,  it  is  only  an  in 
stalment,  and  not  a  finality."  l 

The  unanimity  with  which  the  Southern  states  re 
jected  the  Fourteenth  Amendment,  the  discrimina 
tions  which  they  were  enacting  against  the freedmen 
and  the  race  riots,  particularly  that  of  July  30th  in 
New  Orleans,  were  potent  influences  in  bringing 
Simmer's  colleagues  to  his  way  of  thinking,  and 
"thorough"  became  the  reconstruction  watchword 
of  Congress.  *  When  the  Stevens  bill,3  for  the  division 
of  the  seceded  states  into  military  districts  and  their 
government  by  military  authority,  came  from  the 
House  to  the  Senate,  it  gave  rise  to  so  much  dis 
agreement  that  a  caucus  of  Republican  members  was 
called  to  decide  upon  the  party's  stand,  and  a  com- 


1  Letter  to  F.   W.    Bird,  Jan.   10,  1867.      The  Amendment 
was   then  pending  before    the    Massachusetts   General   Court. 
Sumner  wrote:     "I  think  it  best  to  adopt  the  amendment, " 
but  since  it  was  by  some  considered  "as  an  offer  to  the  rebel 
states,"  he  urged  that  report   or  resolution  should  make  the 
above  declaration.     Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  311. 

2  Rhodes,  Vol.  VI,  p.  30. 

3  This  was  a  substitute  for  the  bill  from  the  joint  Committee 
on  Reconstruction  in  the  last  session,  which  had  virtually  made 
ratification  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment  the  sole  additional 
condition  precedent  to  the  according  of  representation  to  the 
Southern  states.     Stevens  had   "carried  this  bill  through  an 
unwilling  House.     ...     He  had  obtained  his  majority  by 
sarcasm,  taunts,  dragooning  and   by  cracking  the  party  whip. 
There  had  been  no  such  scene  in  Congress  since  Douglas  carried 
his  Kansas-Nebraska  bill  through  the  Senate. "     Rhodes,  Vol. 
VI,  p.  17.     It  passed   the  House  February   13th,  and  on  that 
same  day  was  given  its  first  reading  in  the  Senate,  where  a  proj 
ect  of  similar  character  had  already  been  introduced  by  Senator 
Williams. 


316  CHAELES  SUMMER 

mittee  of  seven  was  then  appointed  to  consider  the 
matter.  After  a  v^ain  attempt  to  persuade  the  com 
mittee  to  add  equal  suffrage  to  the  conditions  to  be 
required  in  their  constitutions  before  the  seceded 
states  should  be  admitted  to  representation  in  Con 
gress,  Sunnier,  although  but  one  other  member  of 
the  committee  agreed  with  him,  gave  notice  that  he 
should  appeal  to  the  caucus.  This  he  did,  and  the 
result  was  a  vote  of  seventeen  to  fifteen  in  favor  of 
imposing  this  condition.  The  vote  was  accepted  as 
binding  upon  the  Eepublicans  in  the  Senate,  and 
it  therefore  proved  decisive  of  the  whole  suffrage 
question.  This  bill,  which  in  effect  abolished  all 
the  Johnson  governments  in  the  South,  was  carried 
over  the  President's  veto.1 

Both  at  this  session  and  at  the  one  which  imme 
diately  followed  it,  Sumner  strove  most  earnestly  to 
impose,  as  further  requisites  of  reconstruction,  the 
provision  of  homesteads  for  the  freedmen  and  of  free 
schools  in  which  there  should  be  no  discrimination 
as  to  race  or  color.  But  the  majority  accepted  the 
view  of  Sherman  and  Freliughuysen,  that  the  addi 
tion  of  further  supplementary  conditions  would  be 
discouraging  and  distracting  as  well  as  imposing  an 
enormous  burden  upon  impoverished  states.  By  a 
tie  vote  on  March  16th  his  effort  to  add  this  feature 
to  the  supplementary  Reconstruction  Act  was  de 
feated.  To  the  end  of  his  life  Sumner  felt  deep  dis- 

1  March  2d.  A  detailed  account  of  the  various  steps  leading 
to  the  passage  of  this  bill  is  given  in  Blaine,  Vol.  II,  p.  250-262. 
Rhodes,  Vol.  VI,  pp.  13-21. 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     317 

appointment  at  this  failure  to  secure  free  schools  and 
homesteads, — a  disappointment  which  at  the  time 
was  so  bitter  that,  as  he  confessed  to  George  F.  « 
Hoar,  "he  left  the  Senate  chamber,  and  when  he 
reached  his  house,  grief  found  vent  in  tears."  l 
When  the  evil  consequences  of  negro  suffrage  are 
laid  to  Sunnier' s  charge,  it  is  but  fair  to  recall  that 
in  his  plan  equal  suffrage  was  to  be  associated  with 
homesteads  and  opportunities  for  free  education. 

From  time  to  time  in  these  debates  Sumner  could 
not  refrain  from  reminding  his  colleagues  that  they 
had  repeatedly  changed  their  views  and  come  to  sup 
port  the  policy  which  they  had  at  first  scorned.  This 
made  their  yielding  by  no  means  more  pleasurable, 
and  did  not  increase  his  colleagues'  good- will  toward 
him.  The  Democrats,  too,  taunted  the  Eepublicans 
with  their  inconsistencies,  and  Buckalew  made  one 
of  the  most  accurate  characterizations  of  Sumner 
when  he  called  him  "  the  pioneer  of  agitation  in  the 
Senate, "  whose  measures  when  made  were  criticized 
by  all  his  colleagues  as  extreme,  inappropriate,  and 
untimely,  "but  were  supported  by  them  the  next 
year  with  a  zeal  and  vehemence  even  greater  than 
his."  2  Two  such  anticipations  of  his  party's  policy 
came  at  this  session  in  Sumner' s  unsuccessful  efforts 
to  get  the  word  "  white7'  stricken  from  the  natural 
ization  laws  and  to  get  a  bill  passed  prohibiting  ex 
clusion  from  office  or  from  jury  service  in  the  Dis 
trict  of  Columbia  because  of  race  or  color. 

1  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  317. 

s  Congressional  Globe,  March  16th,  p.  170. 


318  CHARLES  SUMNER 

This  special  session  of  Congress,  held  in  order  to 
keep  a  tight  rein  on  the  President  and  mainly  de 
voted  to  angrily  debated  measures  for  the  carrying 
out  of  reconstruction,  is  memorable  for  one  act  of  a 
totally  diifereut  character, — the  purchase  of  Alaska. 
Seward  had  carried  on  the  preliminary  negotiations 
in  secret,  and  when  Sunmer,  in  response  to  an  urgent 
summons,  came  to  the  secretary's  house  late  on  the 
evening  of  March  29th,  he  was  astounded  to  find 
that  Russia's  consent  had  been  obtained,  and  that 
at  that  moment  the  treaty  was  being  copied  to  be 
sent  to  the  Senate  for  ratification.  On  the  following 
day  it  was  presented  and  immediately  referred  to 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  Sumner  had 
promised  to  use  his  influence  to  secure  favorable 
action.  Yet  he  confessed  to  friends  that  the  Rus 
sian  treaty  tried  him  sorely.  He  had  no  liking  for 
territorial  acquisitions  that  did  not  come  with  the 
free  consent  of  their  inhabitants.  But  the  question 
was  so  complicated  by  politics,  by  a  desire  to  meet 
the  wishes  of  the  West  and  to  cooperate  with  Sew 
ard  and  with  the  Johnson  administration  when  it 
was  doing  a  creditable  thing,  and  by  the  engage 
ments  into  which  Seward  had  already  entered,  that 
Sumner  was  unwilling  to  take  the  responsibility  of 
opposing  it. l  Moreover,  he  was  already  captivated 
by  the  vision  of  u  a  republic  coextensive  with  the 
continent."  In  the  Senate  and  in  the  press  there 

1  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  325,  gives  these  as  the  grounds  which 
Sumner  at  the  time  told  him  determined  his  support  of  the 
treaty. 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     319 

was  much  ridicule  of  the  purchase  of  a  "  barren, 
and  worthless  God-forsaken  region,"  which  pro 
duces  "nothing  but  icebergs  and  polar  bears." 
Punsters  called  it  "Walrussia."  The  treaty  was 
in  committee  a  week  and  then  Sumner  reported  it 
favorably,  Fessenden  being  the  only  dissenter.  In 
the  executive  session,  April  9th,  Sunnier  made  a 
carefully  prepared  speech  of  three  hours  in  which 
he  set  forth  the  political  and  economic  advantages 
of  the  purchase  so  convincingly  that  the  treaty  was 
ratified  by  a  vote  of  thirty-seven  to  two.  The 
speech  was  later  amplified,  and  stands  to-day  as  a 
marvelously  comprehensive  presentation  of  the 
resources  of  the  unknown  u  Eussian  America." » 
"  Alaska,"  as  its  far-stretching  peninsula  was  called, 
was  by  Sumner  applied  to  the  whole  territory,  and 
by  Seward's  decision  the  name  became  fixed.  In 
this  speech  Sumner  did  not  fail  to  enter  his  protest 
against  the  treaty's  having  been  fully  negotiated 
without  any  consultation  of  the  Senate,  and  against 
its  serving  as  a  precedent  for  "  a  system  of  indis 
criminate  and  costly  annexation," — a  most  timely 
protest,  for  within  a  few  months  Seward  submitted 
a  treaty  with  Denmark  for  the  annexation  of  St. 
Thomas, — a  scheme  which  secured  the  approval  of 
not  a  single  member  of  the  Senate  Committee  on 
Foreign  Relations. 

The  months  of  the  recess  Sumner  devoted  to  two 
literary  tasks.     The   first,  a  paper  entitled  "  Pro 
phetic  Voices  Concerning  America,"  was  a  collection 
1  Works,  Vol.  XI,  pp.  186-349. 


320  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

of  predictions  relating  to  the  American  continent 
and  to  the  United  States,  principally  from  foreign 
ers,  and  ranging  from  those  sayings  of  poets  and 
philosophers  which  may  have  inspired  Columbus, 
to  those  of  Sumner' s  own  friends,  Cobden  and  de 
Tocqueville.  On  the  very  day  of  his  death,  Sumner 
was  at  work  upon  the  proof-sheets  of  a  revised  edi 
tion  of  this  monograph  which  was  being  brought 
out  in  anticipation  of  the  centennial  celebration  in 
1876.  His  second  task  was  the  preparation  of  a 
lecture  which  he  used  in  the  fall  of  1867  on  a  tour 
through  the  West  as  far  as  St.  Louis  and  Milwaukee. 
His  theme  was  ( *  The  Nation, ' '  and  the  lecture  served 
as  a  means  of  impressing  upon  the  public  the  views 
which  had  underlain  his  Senate  speeches  on  recon 
struction.  He  traced  the  development  of  unification 
in  history  and  dwelt  upon  the  steps  which  had  made 
for  the  nationalization  of  the  people  of  the  United 
States.  Chief  stress  was  laid  upon  the  power  and 
duty  of  the  central  government  to  guarantee  and 
maintain  absolute  equality  of  political  and  civil 
rights  against  any  state  interference.  Critics  even 
among  Sumner' s  friends  did  not  fail  to  note  theone- 
sidedness  in  his  thought,  which  seemed  to  regard 
the  state  as  nothing  but  an  administrative  conveni 
ence,  and  took  little  heed  of  any  dangers  from  cen 
tralization. 

In  the  spring  of  1868  retaliation,  incited  by  re 
sentment  against  Great  Britain,  was  again  under 
discussion.  The  House  bill  not  only  vigorously 
asserted  the  right  of  expatriation,  but,  under  Fenian 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     321 

influence,  it  added  two  extraordinary  provisions : 
In  case  of  the  unwarranted  arrest  and  detention  of 
an  American  citizen  by  a  foreign  government,  the 
President  of  the  United  States  might  suspend  com 
mercial  intercourse  with  the  offending  government, 
or  he  might  retaliate  in  kind  by  ordering  the  arrest 
and  detention  of  any  subject  or  citizen  of  that  gov 
ernment  found  within  the  United  States.  This  pre 
posterous  measure  passed  the  House  by  a  vote  of 
104  to  4,  eighty -one  not  voting.  In  spite  of  urgent 
pressure  in  the  Senate  to  secure  prompt  and  favor 
able  action,  Sumner  held  up  this  measure  for  two 
months,  and  when  it  finally  came  from  his  commit 
tee,  there  had  been  substituted  for  the  retaliatory 
provision  a  requirement  that  the  President  report 
to  Congress  any  case  of  the  arrest  or  detention  of 
American  citizens  abroad,  with  a  view  to  a  prompt 
securing  of  their  rights.  In  the  ensuing  debate 
Sumuer  denounced  the  House  retaliatory  measure 
in  detail  as  "  nothing  less  than  monstrous  and  ut 
terly  unworthy  of  a  generous  republic  hoping  to  give 
an  example  to  mankind  "  ;  he  called  attention  to 
the  prodigious  powers  which  it  lavished  upon  the 
President  and  the  outrages  upon  entirely  innocent 
strangers  which  it  authorized.  The  opposition  in 
the  Senate  was  successful  in  defeating  the  most  ob 
noxious  features  of  the  bill,  but  Sumner  could  not 
prevent  the  addition  of  an  amendment  giving  to  the 
President  the  authority  to  "use  such  means,  not 
amounting  to  acts  of  war,  as  he  may  think  necessary 
and  proper  to  obtain  or  effectuate  a  release"  of  any 


322  CHAKLES  SUMKEB 

American  citizen  unjustly  deprived  of  his  liberty 
while  abroad. 

The  session  of  1867-8  was  largely  devoted  to 
the  impeachment  proceedings  against  President 
Johnson.  Sumner' s  first  impressions  favorable  to 
the  President  had  long  since  given  place  to  a  settled 
conviction  that  he  was  the  chief  menace  to  the 
country.  Impeachment  had  his  hearty  approval. 
Long  before  the  process  was  actually  initiated,  and 
consistently  throughout  the  trial,  Sumner  took  the 
ground  that  this  was  a  political  rather  than  a  ju 
dicial  proceeding,  alleging  as  his  justification  for 
this  view  that  whereas  the  Constitution  vested  judi 
cial  power  in  the  courts,  it  gave  to  the  Senate  the 
power  to  try  impeachments.  Hence  the  fact  that 
he  was  a  member  of  the  body  before  which  the 
President  might  presently  be  placed  on  trial,  did 
not  lead  him  to  place  any  curb,  in  the  Senate  or  out 
of  it,  on  his  denunciations  of  Johnson's  misdeeds ; 
and  his  oath,  taken  with  other  senators  at  the  be 
ginning  of  the  trial,  to  "  do  impartial  justice  ac 
cording  to  the  Constitution  and  the  laws,"  did  not 
constrain  him  to  attempt  a  judicial  attitude  of  mind 
or  to  insist  upon  the  safeguards  ordinarily  thrown 
about  the  accused.  Whenever  Sumner  appears  in 
these  proceedings,  it  is  in  the  act  of  urging  a  ver 
dict  in  the  case  of  a  criminal  whose  guilt  has  already 
been  proved.  Thus,  on  the  eve  of  the  trial,  he 
challenged  the  credentials  of  the  man  just  elected 
to  the  Senate  by  the  Maryland  le^slature  on  the 
ground  that  that  state  did  not  have  a  republican 


JOHNSON  AND  KECONSTEUCTION     323 

form  of  government,  and  moved  that  his  credentials 
be  referred,  the  effect  of  which  would  have  been  to 
exclude  a  probably  friendly  judge  during  the  com 
ing  trial.  But  few  senators  supported  this  project. 
Sumuer  protested  against  the  right  of  the  Chief- 
Justice,  under  the  constitutional  rule,  to  decide  or 
vote  upon  any  question,  but  argued  in  favor  of  the 
right  of  Wade,  who,  as  president  pro  tern,  of  the 
Senate,  would  succeed  to  the  presidency  in  the  event 
of  Johnson's  removal,  to  vote  on  all  questions.  He 
favored  hastening  the  despatch  of  business  by  ad 
mitting  "all  evidence  on  either  side  not  trivial  or 
obviously  irrelevant."  l 

As  the  trial  was  drawing  to  a  close,  the  bill  for 
the  admission  of  Arkansas  under  her  reconstructed 
government  was  under  discussion.  In  reporting  the 

1  Among  Simmer's  correspondents  were  many  who  accepted 
his  view  that  an  impeachment  trial  was  not  a  judicial  proceed 
ing  but  a  process  of  removal.  When  Johnson  appointed  Grant 
Secretary  of  War,  Sumner  sent  to  Stanton  a  note  containing  the 
single  word  <k  Stick  !  "  This  called  forth  enthusiastic  plaudits. 
' '  I  shall  always  remember  the  eloquence  of  the  word  for  the 
exigency,  '  Stick  !  '  The  great  War  Secretary  will  '  stick. ' 
Now  there  is  a  word  for  the  next  exigency.  Say  to  the  Senate, 
when  it  comes  to  the  trial,  'Quick!'  "  (Jas.  M.  Stone,  Feb. 
24,  1868.)  Edward  L.  Pierce  wrote,  March  4,  1868.  "  Cautious 
and  conservative  men  .  .  .  now  wish  it  [the  impeaching] 
done  as  the  only  way  to  peace.  To  retain  their  support,  the 
prosecution  must  not  be  languid  and  procrastinating.  Its  suc 
cess  depends  on  its  speed."  W.  S.  Robinson,  April  13,  1868, 
writes:  "I  think  your  votes  to  admit  testimony  are  right. 
They  will  prevent  a  clamor,  and  they  help  destroy  the  stupid 
pretense  that  the  Senate  is  to  be  bound  by  court  rules."  Many 
others  write  in  similar  vein,  and  W.  L.  Garrison,  May  2.  1868, 
subscribes  his  letter :  "  Anxiously  waiting  for  the  ignominious 
dismissal  of  a  perfidious  and  usurping  President."  Sumner 
Corr.,  Harvard  Library. 


324  CHAELE8  SUMNER 

bill  in  the  House  at  this  time,  Stevens  had  plainly 
hinted  that  two  more  judges  might  be  needed  in  the 
Senate.  When  the  question  was  raised  in  the  upper 
house  whether,  if  these  Arkansas  applicants  were 
now  admitted  to  the  Senate,  they  could  become 
members  of  the  court  of  impeachment,  Sumner's 
unhesitating  reply  was  :  "  Of  course  they  can  be." 
Senators  were  allowed  to  file  opinions,  and  eighteen 
of  the  thirty-five  who  voted  for  conviction  did  so. 
Longest  and  most  elaborate  of  all  was  that  of  Sum- 
ner.  He  and  only  one  other  of  the  eighteen  in  their 
opinions  sustained  each  and  every  count  in  the 
articles  of  impeachment,  Sumner  declaring  that  he 
would  "vote,  if  he  could,  i  Guilty  on  all  and  infi 
nitely  more.7  "  ' 

It  must  be  confessed  that  in  this  opinion,  care 
fully  elaborated  and  filling  more  than  thirty  printed 
pages,  Sumner  is  seen  at  his  worst.  Lurid  and 
furious  invective  largely  take  the  place  of  argu 
ment.  ' '  Andrew  Johnson  is  the  impersonation  of 
the  tyrannical  slave  power.  In  him  it  lives  again. 
He  is  the  lineal  descendant  of  John  C.  Calhoun  and 
Jefferson  Davis."  He  is  "  the  attorney  of  slavery, 
— the  usurper  of  legislative  power, — the  violator  of 
law, — the  patron  of  rebels, — the  helping  hand  of  the 
rebellion, — the  kicker  from  office  of  good  citizens, — 
the  open  bunghole  of  the  treasury, — the  architect  of 
the  'Whiskey  King,'— the  stumbling-block  to  all 

1  Works,  Vol.  XII,  pp  318-410.  Trial  of  Andrew  Johnson. 
Published  by  order  of  the  Senate,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  247.  Dewitt, 
The  Impeachment  and  Trial  of  Andrew  J*. \nsnn,  pp.  581-586. 
See  also  Dewitt,  pp.  568,  584,  587. 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     325 

good  laws  by  wanton  vetoes  and  then  by  criminal 
hindrances."  l  Sumner's  lax  interpretation  of  any 
constitutional  provision  which  seemed  to  stand  in 
the  way  of  reaching  what  he  thought  to  be  justice 
received  repeated  illustration  :  i '  Show  me  an  act 
of  evil  example  or  influence  committed  by  a  Presi 
dent,  and  I  show  you  an  iinpeachable  offense."  He 
asserted  that  the  court  of  impeachment  was  not 
to  be  confined  by  "  the  rigid  rules  of  the  common 
law,"  but  had  "  rules  of  its  own,  unknown  to  ordi 
nary  courts."  "The  ordinary  rule  of  evidence  is 
reversed.  If  on  any  point  you  entertain  doubts, 
the  benefit  of  those  doubts  must  be  given  [not  to 
the  accused  but]  to  your  country."  The  President 
"  must  show  that  his  longer  continuance  in  office  is 
not  inconsistent  with  the  public  safety."  He  re 
ferred  to  Johnson's  loose  speech  and  intemperate 
habits  with  a  deliberate  and  brutal  frankness  such 
as  he  had  earlier  directed  against  Butler  and  Mason. 
He  declared :  l '  This  is  a  political  proceeding, 
which  the  people  at  this  moment  are  as  competent 
to  decide  as  this  Senate.  They  are  the  multitudi 
nous  jury.  .  .  .  In  nothing  can  we  escape  their 
judgment,  least  of  all  on  a  question  like  that  now 
before  us." 

The  vote  upon  the  impeachment  charges  lacked 
one  of  the  number  necessary  to  convict.  Sumner 
found  solace  in  declaring:  "The  President  was 
saved  by  the  skin  of  his  teeth.  He  was  saved  by 
one  vote.  I  call  it  a  nominal  acquittal.  There 

1  Dewitt,  pp.  584-585. 


326  CHAELES  SUMNER 

is  ...  a  moral  judgment  against  him."  Yet 
it  was  soon  recognized  even  by  Eepublicau  leaders, 
that  the  attempted  impeachment  had  been  unwise 
and  that  the  large  vote  for  conviction  was  to  be 
attributed  to  party  feeling  rather  than  to  the 
strength  of  the  case  against  Johnson.  Sumner 
often  showed  rare  gifts  of  foresight,  but  he  never 
dreamed  that  within  forty  years  of  his  fierce  on 
slaught  upon  Johnson  there  would  be  general  ac 
quiescence  in  the  verdict  of  the  judicious  historian, 
Mr.  James  Ford  Rhodes:  "The  impeachment 
managers  did  not  prove  their  charges  and  the 
minority  of  the  Senate  undoubtedly  gave  a 
righteous  judgment.  .  .  .  The  glory  of  the 
trial  was  the  action  of  the  seven  recusant  sena 
tors."  Sumner' s  intense  feeling  and  extravagant 
language  must  be  attributed  to  his  disappointment 
at  Johnson's  general  policy  as  to  reconstruction, 
and  in  particular  to  his  shift  as  to  equal  suffrage, 
which  in  Sunmer's  opinion  was  then  the  one  all- 
engrossing  need.  In  this  lay  Johnson's  "bare-faced 
treachery  "  ;  it  was  this  which  made  him  the  one 
* l  enormous  criminal ' '  of  his  century. 

In  the  closing  months  of  Johnson's  administra 
tion,  financial  matters  occupied  much  of  the  atten 
tion  of  Congress.  Under  the  exigencies  of  the  war, 
the  public  debt  had  mounted  to  appalling  propor 
tions,  and  various  measures  intended  to  ease  if  not 
to  evade  that  burden  met  with  favor  both  before 
the  public  and  in  Congress.  Some  of  these,  partic- 
ularly  the  widely-advocated  scheme  for  redeeming 


JOHNSON  AND  RECONSTRUCTION     327 

national  bonds  ill  legal  tender  notes,  seemed  to  New 
England  business  men  to  involve  serious  menace  to 
the  public  credit,  and  it  was  at  their  earnest  in 
sistence  that  Sumner  undertook  to  deal  with  the 
subject.  With  little  taste  for  the  study  of  problems 
of  public  finance,  Suinuer  nevertheless  showed  a 
keen  insight  into  the  best  sources  of  information, 
and  sound  sense  and  growing  skill  in  handling  such 
matters.  In  the  middle  of  July  he  made  a  compre 
hensive  and  temperate  speech  in  the  Senate,  in 
which  he  emphasized  the  fundamental  importance 
of  safeguarding  against  even  suspicion  the  public 
credit,  and  strongly  opposed  any  proposition  to  re 
deem  national  bonds  in  anything  else  than  coin. 
He  advocated  the  funding  of  the  public  debt  in 
long-term  bonds,  and  the  simplification  of  the  in 
ternal  revenue  system,  and  urged  a  prompt  return 
to  specie  payments.  This  speech  was  of  salutary 
influence  in  the  Senate — where  even  Sherman, 
chairman  of  the  Senate  Committee  on  Finance,  had 
given  a  qualified  approval  to  the  "Ohio  idea "  of 
redeeming  national  bonds  in  greenbacks l — and  be 
fore  the  country,  greatly  strengthening  Sumner  s 
reputation  among  conservative  men  of  affairs.  A 
few  months  later,  they  were  somewhat  aghast  to 
hear  Sumner  advocating  the  resumption  of  specie 
payments  at  as  early  a  date  as  July  4,  1869.  Hav 
ing  convinced  himself  that  such  a  step  was  right,  it 
was  characteristic  of  him  to  underestimate  the 
reasons  which  were  to  delay  it  for  ten  years. 

1  E.  P.  Oberholtzer,  Life  of  Jay  Cooke,  Vol.  II,  p.  39 


328  CHAKLES  SUMMER 

In  the  closing  session  of  the  Fortieth  Congress, 
1868-9,  the  Fifteenth  Amendment  was  much  under 
discussion.  To  the  surprise  of  his  colleagues,  Sum- 
ner  did  not  take  an  ardent  interest  in  this  measure. 
In  the  first  place,  he  believed  it  unnecessary,  hold 
ing  the  view — which  few  shared — that  Congress 
already  had  adequate  power  to  prevent  discrimina 
tions  because  of  race  or  color  as  to  the  suffrage. 
Moreover,  he  feared  that  the  agitation  of  the  pro 
posed  amendment,  by  convincing  the  states  that 
they  still  had  the  power  to  make  the  offensive  dis 
criminations,  would  prevent  the  ratification  of  the 
Amendment  and  lead  to  worse  discriminations  in 
the  future.  He  insisted  that  any  further  amend 
ment  ought  to  be  broad  enough  to  comprehend  all 
civil  and  political  rights,  and  not  merely  the  ballot. 
In  his  speeches  he  again  set  forth  his  startling 
thesis  that  "  anything  for  human  rights  is  constitu 
tional,"  and  inveighed  against  those  who  tried  to 
emphasize  the  constitutional  autonomy  of  the  states 
as  if  they  were  ' l  states  rights ' '  men  of  secession 
days.  Yet  after  the  amendment  had  secured  the 
approval  of  Congress,  he  gave  it  hearty  support. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

SUMNER  AND  GRANT  :      THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE 

EVEN  before  the  end  of  the  war  it  became  evident 
that  General  Grant  would  make  the  strongest 
candidate  for  the  presidency  in  1868.  To  be  sure, 
his  political  affiliations  were  somewhat  in  doubt : 
his  last  vote  had  been  cast  for  Buchanan,  but  con 
troversy  with  Johnson,  whose  principal  defenders 
were  among  the  Democrats,  probably  now  led 
Grant  to  align  himself  with  the  Republicans.  To  a 
man  of  Summer's  character  and  career,  and  of  his 
repugnance  to  war,  the  candidacy  of  a  man  of  no 
proved  capacity  for  the  tasks  of  civil  government 
and  whose  sole  ground  for  fame  was  his  dis 
tinguished  military  service,  could  not  make  a 
strong  appeal.  A  year  before  the  election  was  to 
take  place,  the  political  situation  was  discussed  at 
an  informal  gathering  of  eight  or  ten  senators, 
representatives  and  army  men  in  Washington. 
Every  man  present,  with  the  exception  of  Sumner, 
favored  Grant's  nomination  ;  but  Sumner  earnestly 
opposed  the  choice,  insisting  that  far  from  strength 
ening  the  party,  it  would  be  a  confession  of  weak 
ness.  l  Although  the  Massachusetts  senator  acqui 
esced  in  the  nomination  when  made  and  nowhere  in 

'Cincinnati  Commercial,  Jnly  19,  1891,  gives  account  of  this 
conference  of  Nov.  6,  1867.  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  358. 


330  CHAELES  SUMNER 

public  letter  or  speech  opposed  it,  it  is  probable 
that  Grant  knew  from  one  of  the  men  present  at 
that  early  conference — an  intimate  friend  of  the 
general,  who  later  did  him  much  harm  as  an  ad 
viser  and  tale-bearer — of  Sunmer's  disbelief  in  his 
qualifications  for  the  presidency,  and  that  this 
knowledge  affected  his  attitude  toward  the  senator. 
Sumner's  nomination  to  succeed  himself  was  made 
by  acclamation  in  the  state  convention,  and  in  the 
legislature  a  few  months  later  he  was  reflected  for  a 
fourth  term  by  a  vpte  almost  unprecedented  for  its 
unanimity.1  Massachusetts  took  pride  in  Sunnier 
who  was  now  to  be  the  senior  member  of  the  Senate 
in  length  of  service.  Since  the  beginning  of  the  war 
he  had  been  its  most  conspicuous  leader  ;  his  dis 
tinguished  service  as  chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Relations,  the  conversion  of  the  Senate  to 
his  reconstruction  policies,  and  his  skilful  handling 
of  matters  of  public  finance  had  all  combined  to 
bring  him  high  prestige.  In  the  mind  of  the  pub 
lic,  he  measured  up  to  the  standard  of  the  old  Sen 
ate,  in  the  days  when  l t  there  were  giants  in  the 
land."  His  name  had  been  much  canvassed  in  con 
nection  with  other  positions.  In  1864  Lincoln  was 
considering  a  change  in  the  State  Department  and 
led  Sumner  to  believe  that  he  would  have  been 
obliged  to  decide  whether  he  would  supersede  Sew- 
ard,  had  the  President  lived.  Lincoln  may  well 
have  thought  that  this  would  at  once  give  him  an 
effective  Secretary  of  State  and  remove  from  the 

Senate,  37  to  2  ;  House,  216  to  16. 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  331 

Senate  the  chief  obstacle  to  his  reconstruction  pol 
icy.  At  the  time  when  it  seemed  likely  that  con 
viction  in  the  impeachment  trial  would  make  Wade 
President,  he  talked  over  possible  appointments 
confidentially  with  Sumuer,  and  it  was  believed  that 
he  intended  him  for  the  head  of  the  Department  of 
State.1  This  position  as  well  as  that  of  Minister  to 
the  Court  of  St.  James  was  mooted  after  Grant's 
election  was  assured.  But  it  is  doubtful  whether 
Sumuer  would  have  accepted  any  such  change.  As 
he  wrote  to  Lieber  :  "  The  headship  of  the  first  com 
mittee  of  the  Senate  is  equal  in  position  to  anything 
in  our  government  under  the  President  j  and  it 
leaves  to  the  senator  great  opportunities.'7 

On  the  evening  following  Grant's  inauguration, 
Sumner  entertained  at  dinner  two  friends  of  many 
years'  standing,  Hamilton  Fish  and  John  Lothrop 
Motley,  the  historian.  In  the  genial  flow  of  that 
evening's  conversation,  little  did  Sumner  and  Fish 
suspect  that  there  were  soon  to  arise  between  them 
misunderstandings  and  controversies  which  were  to 
embitter  the  remaining  years  of  Sumner' s  life. 

Entirely  inexperienced  in  civic  affairs,  the  new 

1  The  assurance  that  Johnson  was  about  to  be  removed  from 
office  appears  in  many  of  the  letters  from  Sumner's  correspond 
ents.  Edward  Atkinson  feared  that  Wade  was  so  unsound  on 
the  currency  question  that  his  succession  to  the  presidency 
would  be  of  doubtful  benefit.  F.  W.  Bird  and  others  urge 
Sumner,  if  he  is  to  head  Wade's  cabinet,  to  postpone  his  accept 
ance  of  the  position  until  the  final  adjournment  of  the  then 
Massachusetts  legislature,  from  whom  they  feared  that  the 
election  of  a  worthy  senator  could  not  be  secured.  (Sumner 
Corr.,  Harvard  Library.) 


332  CHARLES  SUMNER 

President  made  his  appointments  without  consulting 
senators  or  representatives,  and  in  many  cases  seems 
to  have  been  guided  solely  by  his  personal  acquaint 
ance  or  by  the  judgment  of  intimate  friends,  mostly 
connected  with  the  army.  Thus,  to  the  position  of 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  he  appointed  A.  T. 
Stewart,  the  New  York  millionaire  merchant.  In 
the  Senate  the  point  was  raised  that  Stewart  was 
disqualified  for  this  office  under  the  Act  of  the  First 
Congress  which  expressly  excluded  any  person  "  di 
rectly  or  indirectly  concerned  in  carrying  on  the 
business  of  trade  or  commerce."  An  attempt  was 
made  forthwith  to  repeal  this  disqualifying  clause, 
and  later,  at  Grant's  formal  request,  to  pass  an  act 
exempting  Stewart  from  the  application  of  this  Act. 
Both  of  these  projects  were  blocked  by  objections 
interposed  by  Surnner,  who  insisted  that  such  un 
precedented  action  ought  not  to  be  taken  hastily  or 
without  profound  consideration.  When  once  atten 
tion  was  directed  to  what  was  involved,  enough 
senators  were  found  to  agree  with  Sumner's  view  to 
make  prompt  confirmation  improbable ;  Stewart's 
name  was  accordingly  withdrawn.  Judge  E.  Rock- 
wood  Hoar  was  called  from  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Massachusetts  to  the  position  of  Attorney-General. 
The  post  of  Secretary  of  State  was  awarded  to  E.  B. 
Washburne  as  a  compliment,  to  be  held  but  for  a 
week.  When  the  permanent  appointment  was  an 
nounced,  it  came  as  a  surprise  both  to  the  public 
and  to  the  nominee,  himself.  The  President's  choice 
for  his  chief  official  adviser  fell  upon  Hamilton  Fish, 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  333 

whose  guest  he  had  from  time  to  time  been  in  New 
York.  Fish  had  high  standing  in  the  financial  centre 
of  the  country,  and  Grant  may  well  have  felt  that  a 
conservative  New  York  man  would  prove  a  desirable 
element  in  his  cabinet  as  a  partial  offset  to  others  of  a 
very  different  type.  Moreover,  Fish  was  not  without 
experience  in  public  life :  he  had  served  one  term  each 
as  governor  of  New  York,  as  representative  in  Con 
gress,  and  as  senator,  taking  his  seat  in  1851  at  the 
same  time  with  Sumner  ;  but  each  of  these  terms  of 
service  was  ended  without  exceptional  distinction. 

His  record  was  not  of  a  nature  to  commend  him  to 
Republicans  at  the  polls.  During  all  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  debates  in  the  Senate,  Fish  had  had  not 
one  word  to  say  ;  on  the  question  of  the  repeal  of  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law,  he  once  voted  to  sustain  the 
law  and  two  years  later  withheld  his  vote.  He  had 
been  thoroughly  out  of  accord  with  Seward,  par 
ticularly  upon  the  latter' s  policy  toward  slavery, 
and  confessed  that  only  after  "  much  embarrassment 
in  determining  the  course  which  duty  required" 
did  he  bring  himself  to  vote  for  the  Kepublicau 
candidates  in  1856.  His  later  attitude  toward  the 
party  had  been  unenthusiastic  and  sharply  critical. 
In  1863,  in  urging  Sumuer  to  use  his  influence  to  se 
cure  a  higher  grade  of  appointments  in  the  diplo 
matic  service  he  wrote:  u  I  see  country  and  gov 
ernment  and  nationality  fading  and  passing  away 
amid  the  riot  of  vulgarity,  violence  and  corruption, 
and  under  the  rule  of  imbecility  and  vacillation."  * 
1  Jan.  27,  1863.  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  377. 


334  CHARLES  8UMNBE 

In  their  old  days  together  in  the  Senate,  despite 
his  disappointment  at  Fish's  lack  of  sympathy  with 
his  anti-slavery  efforts,  Stiniuer  had  early  formed 
an  intimacy  with  his  colleague,  and  no  guest  was 
more  welcome  in  the  New  York  senator's  home, 
where  in  Mrs.  Fish  Sumner  found  a  high-minded 
friend  who  followed  each  step  of  his  career  in  the 
cause  of  freedom  with  ardent  sympathy  and  encour 
agement.  After  Fish's  retirement  from  the  Senate 
Sumner  kept  up  a  correspondence  with  him,  and 
visited  him  often  in  New  York  City  and  at  his  coun 
try  home.  He  was  admitted  into  family  confidences 
such  as  are  open  only  to  the  closest  intimates,  was 
pressed  with  thanks  for  letters  which  brought  to  the 
Fishes  the  hospitalities  of  Sumner' s  best  friends 
abroad,  was  sought  out  by  them  for  a  call  of  loving 
sympathy  when  he  was  undergoing  the  moxa  in 
Paris,  and  most  warmly  welcomed  upon  his  return 
to  America.  To  Sumner,  therefore,  the  announce 
ment  of  Fish's  appointment  was  most  gratifying. 
Hardly  a  week  had  passed  since  that  dinner  at  Surn- 
ner's  house,  when  he  received  a  confidential  letter 
from  Fish,  stating  that  he  had  reluctantly  de 
cided  to  go  to  Washington  "  to  undertake  duties  for 
which  I  have  little  taste  and  less  fitness.  .  .  . 
In  yielding,  I  hoped  that  I  could  rely  upon  your 
friendship  and  your  experience  and  ability,  for  your 
support  and  aid  to  supply  my  manifold  deficien 
cies."  In  genuinely  pathetic  vein,  the  letter  dwells 
upon  his  great  reluctance  to  accent  the  position,  and 
ends  with  a  request  that  Sumner  come  to  see  him 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  335 

before  it  should  be  necessary  for  him  to  attend  a 
cabinet  meeting.1 

In  the  first  months  of  the  new  administration 
Sunnier' s  relations  were  cordial  both  with  the  Presi 
dent  and  with  his  Secretary  of  State.  As  might  be 
inferred  from  Fish's  comments  on  appointments 
made  during  Lincoln's  first  term,  he  and  Sumner 
were  in  hearty  accord  as  to  the  type  of  men  desirable 
in  the  diplomatic  service.  Fish  continued  to  seek 
Sumner' 3  counsel,  not  only  as  to  appointments  but 
as  to  difficult  questions  which  arose  within  the  de 
partment  ;  indeed,  this  intimacy  was  noted  as  quite 
beyond  precedent  between  men  occupying  their  re 
spective  official  positions.  Secretary  Fish  at  first 
found  his  new  office  far  from  congenial ;  he  wrote  to 
Sumner  that  he  most  sincerely  wished  himself  out 
of  the  department.  He  intended  to  withdraw  before 
the  meeting  of  Congress,  but  in  midsummer  reluc 
tantly  determined  to  fill  out  one  year  of  service. 

By  far  the  heaviest  responsibility  that  devolved 
upon  the  State  Department  when  Fish  came  to  its 
head  was  the  adjustment  of  the  differences  with 
Great  Britain  ;  and  his  task  was  greatly  complicated 
by  the  mistakes  made  under  the  previous  adminis 
tration.  In  the  summer  of  1868,  Beverdy  Johnson, 
a  senator  from  Maryland,  had  been  appointed  Min 
ister  to  England.  He  was  an  able  lawyer,  and, 
though  lacking  in  diplomatic  experience,  was 
unanimously  confirmed  as  a  more  satisfactory  selec 
tion  than  any  other  likely  to  be  made  by  President 
1  March  13,  1869.  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  379. 


336  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

Johnson.  But  in  England  he  showed  little  discre 
tion.  He  was  enamored  of  his  own  speechmaking 
and  he  soon  disgusted  Americans  by  the  friendliness 
of  his  advances  toward  those  who  had  aided  the 
Confederates.  It  was  not  Se  ward's  expectation  that 
he  would  concern  himself  with  the  great  subjects  of 
controversy  then  pending  between  the  United  States 
and  England  ;  but,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  in 
November  the  administration  to  which  he  owed  his 
appointment  had  been  thoroughly  discredited  at  the 
polls,  he  assumed  to  negotiate  a  treaty  covering  the 
grievances  of  the  United  States  against  England. 
This  Johnson- Clarendon  Convention,  dated  January 
14,  1869,  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Committee  on  For 
eign  Eelatious  when  the  new  administration  came 
into  power.  Under  the  circumstances,  the  most 
critical  appointment  to  the  diplomatic  service  was 
that  of  Minister  to  the  Court  of  St.  James,  and  for 
this  post  the  selection  fell  upon  John  Lothrop  Mot 
ley.  His  name  had  been  suggested  by  Sumner  in  a 
list  with  several  other  possible  appointees  for  foreign 
posts,  and  there  is  no  doubt  that  Sumner' s  friend 
ship  for  the  man  and  his  characteristic  overvaluation 
of  literary  distinction  enlisted  him  strongly  in  Mot 
ley's  support.  But  that  he  was  "Sumner's  man," 
and  appointed  principally  because  of  his  urgent  so 
licitation,  there  is  little  ground  to  believe.1  Motley 

*G.  S.  Boutwell,  in  Sixty  Yearn  of  Public  Life,  Vol.  II,  p.  214, 
asserts  that  Grant  told  him:  "Such  was  rny  impression  of 
Motley  when  I  saw  him  that  I  should  have  withheld  his  ap 
pointment,  if  I  had  not  made  a  promise  to  Sumner." 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  337 

had  enjoyed  pleasant  relations  with  Fish  for  many 
years  ;  in  the  recent  campaign  he  had  made  a  bril 
liant  speech  highly  eulogistic  of  Grant,  and  in  the 
month  preceding  the  inauguration  he  had  been 
thrown  much  in  Grant's  society  at  Washington. 
That  Simmer's  support  was  a  mere  incident  in  pro 
curing  an  appointment  which  was  natural  both  be 
cause  of  Motley's  friendship  with  Grant  and  with 
Fish,  and  because  of  his  international  reputation  as 
the  historian  of  the  Dutch  Republic,  is  the  more 
probable  from  the  fact  that  the  appointment  of 
Dr.  Howe  as  Minister  to  Greece,  which  Simmer  did 
most  earnestly  urge,  was  refused. 

On  the  12th  of  April  Motley's  nomination  was 
confirmed  by  the  Senate,  and  on  the  following  day 
he  was  commissioned  as  Minister  to  England.  On 
that  same  day  Simmer  presented  the  adverse  report 
from  his  committee  upon  the  Johnson -Clarendon 
Convention.  This  agreement  had  secured  the  ap 
proval  of  not  a  single  member  of  the  committee, 
although  Su inner  had  urged  its  most  careful  consid 
eration,  declaring,  as  the  committee's  vote  was 
about  to  be  taken  :  "  We  begin  to-day  an  interna 
tional  debate,  the  greatest  of  our  history,  and,  be 
fore  it  is  finished,  in  all  probability  the  greatest  of 
all  history."  Since  the  beginning  of  the  war  Sum- 
ner  had  been  doing  his  utmost  to  allay  unreasonable 
passion  against  England  ;  but  during  these  years 
his  sense  of  the  injury  inflicted  upon  the  United 
States  had  not  grown  less.  Probably  it  would  have 
been  better  if  Sumner  had  kept  silent.  It  was 


338  CHAELES  SUMNEK 

known  that  the  convention  stood  not  the  slightest 
chance  of  being  ratified  but  as  Fesseuden  caustically 
remarked:  u  It  was  not  possible  for  Sumner  to 
omit  to  avail  himself  of  such  an  occasion."  In  his 
present  speech  he  criticized  the  pending  convention 
as  utterly  inadequate  in  that  it  provided  only  for  the 
settlement  of  individual  claims,  made  no  expression 
of  regret  for  injuries  of  the  past,  declared  no  past  rule 
of  international  duty  and  laid  down  no  such  rule  for 
the  future.  He  directed  the  severest  condemnation 
against  England's  precipitate  concession  of  ocean 
belligerency,  the  Queen's  proclamation  having  been 
issued  on  the  very  day  of  the  new  minister's  arrival, 
as  if  to  forestall  any  negotiations  he  might  be  au 
thorized  to  make.  He  therefore  grouped  our  griev 
ances  under  three  heads  :  The  first  consisted  of  the 
claims  of  individuals  for  damages  wrought  by  the 
Alabama  and  other  cruisers  ;  upon  these  he  accepted 
Cobden's  estimate  of  $15,000,000.  For  a  second 
claim  for  "damages  to  commerce  driven  from  the 
ocean"  lie  suggested  that  the  compensation  should 
be  $110,000,000.  There  still  remained  "  that  other 
damage,  immense  and  infinite,  caused  by  the  pro 
longation  of  the  war,  all  of  which  may  be  called 
national  in  contradistinction  to  individual."  These 
"  national  claims,"  which  he  was  here  the  first  offi 
cially  to  advance,  and  which  were  to  be  for  years 
much  in  controversy,  he  did  not  venture  to  estimate  ; 
but  he  did  declare  that  the  cost  of  suppressing  the 
rebellion  had  been  more  than  $4,000,000,000,  and 

*J.  B.  Moore,  International  Arbitrations,  Vol.  I,  p.  508. 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  339 

that  through  British  dereliction,  largely  in  the  con 
cession  of  belligerent  rights  upon  the  ocean,  the  war 
had  been  "  doubled  in  duration.  .  .  .  England 
is  justly  responsible  for  the  additional  expenditure.7' 

This  speech  of  an  hour,  which  probably  changed 
not  a  single  vote  on  the  pending  treaty,  played  no 
small  part  in  the  later  controversy. 

What  Sumner  here  sought  to  accomplish,  as  Carl 
Schurz  later  declared,  was  "  not  to  extort  from  Eng 
land  a  large  sum  of  money,  but  to  put  our  grievance 
in  the  strongest  light ;  to  convince  England  of  the 
great  wrong  she  had  inflicted  upon  us  and  thus  pre 
pare  a  composition  which,  consisting  more  in  the 
settlement  of  great  principles  and  rules  of  inter 
national  law  to  govern  the  future  intercourse  of 
nations  than  in  the  payment  of  large  damages,  would 
remove  all  questions  of  difference."  l  The  conven 
tion  was  rejected  in  the  Senate  by  a  vote  of  fifty-four 
to  one.  Sumner' s  speech,  as  the  British  minister 
reported  to  his  government,  was  "received  with 
vehement  applause  by  the  whole  Eepubli can  press." 
It  certainly  accorded  with  popular  sentiment,  which 
was  still  sore  at  the  attitude  and  action  of  the  British 
government  during  the  war.  Sumner  had  con 
sulted  with  Grant  before  the  speech  and  received 
his  thanks  and  congratulations  after  it.2  He  also 

1  Eulogy  on  Somner,  Massachusetts  Memorial  of  Charles  Sumner, 
p   234. 

2  Letter  to  Longfellow,  May  25,  1869.     Even  so  discriminating 
a  critic  as   Lowell  wrote  to  Sumner  within  ten  days  after  the 
speech  :     ''I  think  you  have  struck  exactly  the  true  note — ex 
pressing  the  national  feeling  with  temper  and  dignity."     (April 


340  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

had  assurance  of  Secretary  Fish's  general  accord 
ance  with  the  positions  which  he  had  there  taken. 

Though  Sunnier  considered  that  his  speech  was 
" pacific"  in  tone,  it  had  a  very  different  sound  to 
others.  In  England  it  aroused  intense  bitterness. 
Even  John  Bright,  who  throughout  the  war  had 
been  carrying  on  a  most  intimate  and  sympathetic 
correspondence  with  Sunnier  for  the  purpose  of 
preventing  any  injury  from  England  to  the  North 
ern  cause,  now  declared  that  he  l  i  supposed  the 
speech  was  Sumner's  bid  for  the  presidency  "  and 
that  he  (Sumner)  "  was  either  a  fool  himself,  or  else 
thought  the  English  public  and  their  public  men 
were  fools."  The  question  was  on  every  one's  lips, 
What  does  he  intend  shall  be  the  outcome?  Sum 
ner  called  England  to  an  accounting  for  damages 
"immense  and  infinite,5'  yet  urged  neither  haste 
nor  force.  Charles  Francis  Adams  probably  pene 
trated  the  mystery,  when  he  declared  that  intima 
tions  had  been  made  to  him  that  u  the  end  of  it  all 

22d.  Snmner  Corr.  MS.,  Harvard  Library.)  But  another  ten 
days  had  not  passed  before  misgivings  arose.  To  E.  L.  Godkiu 
he  wrote  :  "I  fear  it  was  not  a  wise  speech.  Was  he  not  try 
ing  rather  to  chime  in  with  that  [national]  feeling,  than  to  give 
it  a  jnster  and  manlier  direction  ?"  (May  2d.  Letters,  Vo]. 
II,  p.  29.  See  also  pp.  26,  41.)  But  it  was  not  Sumner's  habit 
to  try  to  "  chime  in  with  "  others'  feelings  or  beliefs.  If  he  is  to 
be  blamed,  it  is  for  bias  and  one-sidedness  rather  than  for  lack 
of  independence  or  of  purpose  to  lead  in  the  right  direction.  Of 
this  speech  Rhodes  says:  "Of  all  the  outrageous  claims  of 
which  our  diplomatic  annals  are  full,  I  can  call  to  mind  none 
more  BO  than  this."  He  emphasizes  the  fact  that  the  "  pacific  " 
tone  of  its  conclusion  by  no  means  accords  with  the  main  body 
of  the  speech  which  was  distinctly  exasperating.  Vol.  VI, 
p.  339. 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  341 

was  to  be  the  annexation  of  Canada  by  way  of  full 
indemnity."  l 

In  the  summer  of  1865  Grant  had  indicated  that 
he  regarded  Great  Britain's  conduct  during  the  war 
as  a  grievous  wrong  to  the  United  States  ;  and  his 
notions  of  compensation  were  restrained  neither  by 
Suinner's  love  for  England  nor  by  Sumner's  hatred 
for  war.  Only  a  few  months  after  Lee's  surrender, 
he  told  Surnuer  that  he  "  cared  little  whether  Eng 
land  paid  '  our  little  bill '  or  not ;  upon  the  whole, 
he  would  rather  she  should  not,  as  that  would  leave 
the  precedeut  of  her  conduct  in  full  force  for  us  to 
follow,  and  he  wished  it  understood  that  we  should 
follow  it.  He  thought  we  should  make  more  out  of 
'  the  precedent'  than  out  of  i  the  bill/  and  thought 
Boston  especially  would  gain."  2 

But  although  the  President  held  England  to  be 
grievously  in  our  debt,  and  although  he  was  a 
zealous  expansionist,  and  believed  that  Canada 
could  be  secured  by  a  short  campaign,  if  war  should 
ensue,  and  that  in  such  a  war  we  should  have  little 
to  fear,  his  interest  was  now  engrossed  in  quite  an 
other  quarter.  For  some  time  an  insurrection  had 
been  in  progress  in  Cuba,  and  President  Grant's 
sympathies  were  warmly  enlisted  in  behalf  of  the 
insurgents.  On  June  9,  1869,  Sunnier  had  a  long 
conference  with  the  President,  who  proposed  issu- 

1  Quoted  by  C.  F.  Adams  in  The  Treaty  of  Washington,  p.  103. 
This  is  the  most  comprehensive  and  painstaking  study  upon 
this  subject. 

8  Letter  from  Sumner  to  Bright,  Aug.  8,  1865,  Pierce,  Volf 
IV,  p.  255, 


342  CHARLES  SUMNEK 

ing  in  aid  of  the  Cubans  a  proclamation  l '  identical 
with  that  issued  by  Spain  with  regard  to  us."  » 
Later  in  the  day  Sumuer  called  upon  Fish,  who 
had  just  been  conferring  with  the  British  minister, 
and  told  Sumner  that  he  had  said  to  him  "that  our 
claims  were  too  large  to  be  settled  pecuniarily,  and 
sounded  him  about  Canada,  to  which  he  replied  that 
England  did  not  wish  to  keep  Canada,  but  could  not 
part  with  it,  without  the  consent  of  the  [Canadian] 
population."  2 

Grant  and  Sumuer  were  now  at  one  in  thinking 
that  England  had  done  us  grievous  wrong,  for 
which  the  cession  of  British  America  would  not  be 
too  great  a  compensation,  and  in  being  willing  that 
the  matter  stand  in  an  unsettled  state,  awaiting  it 
might  be  a  time  when  Canadian  sentiment  should 
approve  a  separation  which  the  British  government 
already  looked  upon  with  favor.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  Grant  and  Sumner  were  as  far  apart  as  the 
poles  on  this  point :  Sumner  traced  the  root  of 
England's  wrong  to  the  United  States  to  that  "  fatal 
precedent,"  the  Queen's  proclamation  conceding 
belligerent  rights  upon  the  ocean  to  the  Confeder- 

1  Sumner,  in  letter  to  Motley,  June  11,  1869.  More 
over,  this  purpose  he  actually  carried  out,  for  late  in  the 
summer  he  drew  up  and  signed  such  a  proclamation,  and 
sent  it  to  Fish  with  orders  to  issue  it;  but  Fish  "  put  it  away  in 
a  safe  place,"  and  in  the  course  of  a  few  days  events  had 
crowded  in,  which  led  Grant  to  be  exceedingly  grateful  that 
Fish's  conservatism  had  protected  his  administration  from  the 
mistakes  into  which  his  impetuous  action  was  on  the  point  of 
plunging  it.  C.  F.  Adams,  p.  118. 

3  Sumner,  letter  to  Motley,  as  above. 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  343 

ates,  while  at  this  very  moment  the  President's  heart 
was  set  upon  issuing  a  precisely  similar  proclama 
tion  in  behalf  of  the  Cubans. 

But  other  complications  were  already  in  sight. 
Although  balked  in  his  Cuban  programme,  the 
President  was  not  deterred  from  looking  into  an 
other  opportunity  for  Southern  expansion,  presented 
by  the  disordered  conditions  in  San  Domingo.  For 
the  moment,  the  adventurer,  Baez,  was  in  power  in 
this  pseudo-republic  ;  but,  not  having  enough  force 
at  his  command  to  subdue  the  rival  with  whom  for 
years  he  had  been  playing  see-saw  in  government, 
he  was  doing  his  best  to  enlist  the  active  interven 
tion  of  the  United  States  in  his  behalf.  For  some 
unknown  reason,  Grant  held  fantastically  extrava 
gant  notions  as  to  the  resources  and  strategic  im 
portance  of  the  island,  and  the  project  of  a  protect 
orate  if  not  of  annexation  early  secured  his  ardent 
support.  A  month  after  that  day  of  earnest  confer 
ences  over  British  claims  and  Cuban  belligerency, 
the  President  sent  one  of  his  military  favorites, 
Babcock,  upon  a  man-of-war,  with  instructions 
which  upon  their  face  merely  authorized  him  to 
make  full  inquiry  into  the  resources  of  the  island, 
the  characteristics  of  the  people  and  their  views  as 
to  annexation.  Nevertheless,  the  Secretary  of  the 
Navy  ordered  the  commander  of  this  war  vessel  to 
give  Babcock  "  the  moral  support  of  his  guns,"  and 
a  month  later  a  second  war  vessel  was  despatched 
to  be  at  his  service.  In  September  this  personal 
envoy  returned,  bearing  a  ( '  protocol ' '  which  he 


344  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

had  assumed  to  negotiate  for  the  annexation  of  the 
republic  of  San  Domingo  to  the  United  States  upon 
payment  by  the  latter  of  $1,500,000.  The  most 
astounding  thing  in  this  unprecedented  document 
was  the  pledge  that  "  his  Excellency,  General 
Grant,  President  of  the  United  States,  promises 
privately  to  use  all  his  influence  in  order  that  the 
.idea  of  annexing  the  Dominican  republic  to  the 
United  States  may  acquire  such  a  degree  of  popu 
larity  among  members  of  Congress  as  will  be  neces 
sary  for  its  accomplishment."1  A  year  or  more 
later,  President  Grant  declared  :  a  General  Bab- 
cock's  conduct  throughout  merits  my  entire  ap 
proval."  2  After  conferences  in  Washington,  Bab- 
cock  returned  to  Dominica,  under  instructions  from 
Fish  and  with  a  naval  force  under  orders  to  "  con 
form  to  all  his  wishes."  On  the  3d  of  December  he 
concluded  a  treaty  for  the  annexation  of  San  Do 
mingo  and  another  for  the  lease  of  the  Bay  of 
Samana. 

Meantime  our  relations  with  England  had  been 
getting  more  complicated.  As  a  result  of  many 
conferences  between  Fish  and  Sumner,  Motley's  in 
structions  had  been  framed.  The  task  was  made 
difficult  by  the  President's  wish  to  concede  bellig 
erency  to  the  Cuban  insurgents,  and  by  the  feeling 
which  had  been  aroused  in  England  by  Sunmer's 
speech  in  its  arraignment  of  the  British  government 
while  the  French  emperor  escaped  his  condemua- 

1  N.  Y.  Times,  June  28,  1870.     Pierce,  "&>1.  JV,  p.  430. 
*  Letter  to  Senator  Nye,  June  27,  1870, 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  345 

tion.  The  instructions  were  therefore  so  phrased  as 
to  recognize  "  the  right  of  a  power  to  define  its  re 
lations  to  the  parties  in  a  civil  conflict  in  another 
country,"  but  they  refused  to  admit  the  propriety 
of  the  Queen's  proclamation,  directing  especial 
reprobation  against  it  as  "  the  beginning  and  animus 
of  that  course  of  conduct  which  resulted  so  disas 
trously  to  the  United  States,"  and  as  "  foreshadow 
ing  future  events."  Furthermore,  the  instructions 
laid  stress  upon  the  fact  that,  while  other  powers 
were  contemporaneous  with  England  in  similar 
concession,  "  it  was  in  England  only  that  the  con 
cession  was  supplemeuted  by  acts  causing  direct 
damage  to  the  United  States."1  The  diplomatic 
slate  had  been  wiped  clean  of  all  previous  writing 
by  the  rejection  of  the  Johnson -Clarendon  Conven 
tion.  In  midsummer  (July  19th)  Simmer  wrote  to 
Gushing:  "It  seems  best  that  our  case,  in  length 
and  breadth,  with  all  details,  should  be  stated  to 
England  without  any  demand  of  any  kind.  Eng 
land  must  know  our  grievances  before  any  demand 
can  be  presented." 

Sunnier  was  Fish's  guest  at  his  country  home  in 
August  and  urged  that  the  statement  of  our  claims 
be  again  brought  to  the  notice  of  the  British  gov 
ernment.  On  September  25,  1869,  Fish  seut  to 
Motley  a  despatch,  drawn  by  Caleb  Gushing,  which 
summarized  the  points  of  our  case  in  such  a  way 
that  British  public  men  declared  it  was  "Mr. 
Suniner's  speech  over  again,"  and  that  it  "  out- 
1  J.  B.  Moore,  International  Arbitrations,  Vol.  I,  p.  513. 


346  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

Suinuered  Sumuer."  The  prospects  of  success  of 
the  Cuban  insurgents  had  dwindled  so  that  their 
recognition  as  belligerents  was  not  now  to  bethought 
of.  No  longer  restrained  by  that  consideration,  the 
President  did  not  hesitate  to  insert  in  his  annual 
message  passages  held  in  England  to  be  decidedly 
menacing.  In  these  he  listed  the  American  claims, 
not  confining  them  to  injuries  to  individuals,  but 
closely  following  the  enumeration  of  what  Sunnier 
had  called  "  national  claims,"  even  including  the 
increased  rates  of  insurance,  the  decrease  and  trans 
fer  to  Great  Britain  of  our  commercial  marine,  and 
* l  the  prolongation  of  the  war  and  the  increased  cost 
(both  in  treasure  and  in  lives)  of  its  suppression. ' ' 

Despite  this  apparent  agreement,  some  tension 
had  already  arisen  between  Sumner  and  the  Presi 
dent  and  his  Secretary  of  State.  There  had  been 
differences  of  opinion  as  to  the  instructions  to  be 
given  to  Motley,  and  Sumner  had  assumed  a 
dominating  tone  which  Fish  found  none  the  less 
galling  from  the  fact  that  his  own  deference  to  Sum 
ner  upon  taking  office  made  it  not  unnatural.  "  Is 
it  the  purpose  of  this  administration  to  sacrifice  me, 
—me,  a  senator  from  Massachusetts?"  was  Suni- 
uer's  outraged  inquiry,  and  later,  in  dissenting  from 
a  plan  of  the  Secretary' s,  he  declared  :  "I  ought  not 
in  any  way  to  be  a  party  to  a  statement  which 
abandons  or  enfeebles  any  of  the  just  grounds  of  my 
country  as  already  expounded  by  Seward,  Adams 
and  myself."  Whether  he  had  been  especially  in 
sistent  in  urging  Motley's  appointment  or  not,  there 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  347 

can  be  no  question  that  in  Simmer's  frequent  and 
very  voluminous  letters,  that  minister  found  exposi 
tions  of  his  duty  and  of  American  policy  quite  as 
direct  and  detailed  as  those  received  from  the  Secre 
tary  of  State.  Soon  after  Motley's  appointment, 
Charles  Francis  Adams  made  the  shrewd  prophecy 
that  the  new  minister  would  meet  with  one  em 
barrassment  which  he  himself  had  never  had  to  en 
counter  ;— he  would  have  to  deal  with  two  masters. 
And  so  at  London  it  was  presently  found  that  Mot 
ley  was  represeutiug  Charles  Sumuer  more  distinctly 
than  the  Grant  administration.  In  his  very  first 
interview  with  Lord  Clarendon,  he  laid  great  stress 
upon  the  grievous  offense  involved  in  the  proclama 
tion  of  belligerency,  a  point  which  Fish  believed 
Sumuer' s  speech  had  overstrained  and  the  very 
point  which  Grant  at  just  that  juncture  was  partic 
ularly  anxious  to  have  kept  in  the  background.1 
On  June  7th,  so  Sumuer  reported  to  Motley,  Grant 
declared  that  he  was  satisfied  Motley  was  i  i  the  best 
man  for  England."  But  the  President,  whose 
chronology  is  not  always  accurate,  later  declared 
that  on  receipt  of  Motley's  report  of  this  interview 

1  How  widely  and  exasperatingly  Motley  in  this  interview 
departed  from  the  spirit  of  his  instructions  and  voiced  Suraner's 
distinctive  views  is  clearly  brought  out  by  J.  B.  Moore. 
(International  Arbitrations,  Vol.  I,  pp.  516-518.)  Motley  later 
asserted  that  he  had  sincerely  endeavored  to  carry  out  his  in 
structions.  But  the  eminent  historian  surely  showed  here  little 
-skill  as  a  diplomatist.  "  Instead  of  refraining  from  discussion, 
he  precipitated  it,  suggesting  '  the  contingencies  of  war  and 
peace  '  and  confessing  to  a  '  despondent  feeling  '  as  to  the  '  pos 
sibility  of  the  two  nations  ever  understanding  each  other.'  " 


348  CHAELES  SUMMER 

— three  weeks  later  than  the  above  expression  of  ap 
proval — he  was  ' l  very  angry, ' '  and  ' '  went  over  to 
the  State  Department  and  told  Governor  Fish  to 
dismiss  Motley  at  once."  This  Fish  did  not  do,  but 
he  presently  gave  Motley  to  understand  that  the 
entire  discussion  of  the  claims  against  Great  Britain 
was  transferred  to  Washington.  To  Sumner  it  was 
intimated  that  the  reason  for  this  step  was  that  the 
Senate  was  there  accessible  for  advice,  and  that  in 
Washington  there  would  be  better  prospect  of 
securing  a  settlement  "  than  where  the  late  attempt 
at  a  convention  resulted  so  disastrously. "  A  year 
later,  however,  Fish  declared  that  the  change  was 
made  because  of  Motley's  disobedience  to  instruc 
tions.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  his  offense  had 
reached  that  point,  but  there  can  be  no  question 
that  the  Secretary  felt  himself  embarrassed  by  a 
minister  who  reflected  so  clearly  Sumner's  distinct 
ive  views,  and  that  he  determined  to  take  the 
negotiation  into  his  own  hands  and  carry  it  through 
according  to  his  own  ideas. 

President  Grant's  offhand  announcement  in 
cabinet  meeting  of  Babcock's  negotiation  of  the 
protocol  for  the  annexation  of  San  Domingo  had 
met  with  a  most  embarrassing  reception  ;  and  Fish, 
on  general  principles  not  favorably  disposed  to  an 
nexation  toward  the  south,  was  in  addition  so  af 
fronted  by  the  negotiation  of  a  treaty  without  tak 
ing  him,  the  head  of  the  State  Department,  into 
consultation,  that  he  pressed  his  resignation  upon 
Grant,  who  earnestly  besought -him  to  retain  his 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  349 

portfolio,  and  finally  secured  his  support  even  for  the 
San  Domingo  project.  Undaunted  by  these  experi 
ences,  Grant  now  set  out  to  secure  the  ratification  of 
his  treaties.  He  knew  that  Suinner  was  in  position 
to  have  more  iutluence  than  any  other  man  upon  the 
result,  and  with  characteristic  directness  and  igno 
rance  of,  or  contempt  for,  formal  procedure,  he 
sought  to  assure  himself  of  the  senator's  support. 
Early  in  January,  1870,  Suinner  was  entertaining 
two  friends  one  evening  at  dinner,  when  the  Presi 
dent  of  the  United  States  called.  Recognizing  the 
voice  at  the  door,  Suinner  himself  left  the  dining- 
room,  and  presently  returned  with  Grant,  who  took 
a  seat  at  the  table,  insisting  that  the  other  guests  re 
main.  The  conversation  which  ensued  was  singu 
larly  maladroit  on  both  sides.  The  President 
promptly  introduced  his  errand  by  saying  that  there 
were  two  treaties  relating  to  San  Domingo  about 
which  he  had  wished  to  speak  with  the  senator  (to 
whom  he  four  times  referred  as  "  chairman  of  the 
Judiciary  Committee"),  since  they  were  soon  to 
come  before  his  committee.  Sumner,  unwilling  to 
give  his  opinion  in  advance  of  investigation,  sought 
to  divert  the  conversation  to  another  topic,  and  by 
ill  chance  chose  this  occasion  to  broach  the  case  of 
Governor  Ashley,  and  even  to  read  a  long  letter 
from  the  man,  whom  Grant  had  recently  removed 
from  the  governorship  of  Montana  Territory.  This 
subject  was  highly  distasteful  to  Grant  and  in 
evident  annoyance  he  started  to  take  his  leave. 
Sumner  followed  him  to  the  door,  and,  the  matter 


350  CHARLES  SUMNER 

of  the  treaties  having  again  been  raised  by  the 
President,  though  without  explaining  their  nature, 
Simmer  said  :  i  i  Mr.  President,  I  am  an  adminis 
tration  man,  and  whatever  you  do  will  always  find 
in  me  the  most  careful  and  candid  consideration."  ' 
The  whole  interview  embarrassed  Sumner,  than 
whom  no  man  was  ever  less  ready  to  commit  him 
self  without  fall  knowledge  of  what  was  at  issue. 
But  Grant's  make-up  was  of  a  different  nature.  He 
had  dropped  in  on  Suinner  that  evening  to  secure 
his  support,  and  he  left  his  door  in  the  belief  that 
this  "  chairman  of  the  Judiciary  Committee  "  stood 
pledged  to  uphold  his  chief's  policy. 

A  few  days  later  the  two  treaties  came  before  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Eelations.  Sumiier  was  not 
on  principle  opposed  to  expansion,  though  he  hoped 
for  expansion  to  the  north,  which  would  include 
people  of  English  stock,  rather  than  in  the  tropics. 
At  first,  therefore,  his  prime  concern  was  as  to  the 
effect  which  the  annexation  of  San  Domingo  would 
have  upon  the  other  negro  republic  upon  the  island, 
and  also  upon  the  newly  emancipated  negroes  of 
this  country.  But  some  of  the  despatches  led  him 
to  suspect  what  a  visit  to  the  State  Department 
speedily  confirmed, — that  these  treaties  had  been 
negotiated  with  a  ruler  who  maintained  himself  in 
power  only  by  his  reliance  upon  United  States  ships 

1  Sumner  gave  an  account  of  this  interview  in  his  speech  in 
Senate,  Dec.  21,  1870,  Congressional  Globe,  p.  253.  Works, 
Vol.  XIV,  pp.  125,  126.  Other  references,  Pierce,  Vol.  IV, 
p.  434,  n.  2. 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  351 

of  war,  and  that  therefore  we  were  "  engaged  in 
forcing  upon  a  weak  people  the  sacrifice  of  their 
country."  From  the  moment  of  that  discovery, 
the  whole  transaction  became  utterly  repugnant  to 
Sunnier  ;  but  he  made  the  mistake — which  he  after 
ward  acknowledged  and  regretted — of  not  going 
directly  to  the  President  and  telling  him  frankly 
that  he  could  not  give  the  treaties  his  support. 
They  were  before  the  committee  nearly  two  months. 
Grant  grew  restive  at  the  delay,  and  presently  came 
to  believe  that  Sumuer  was  the  obstruction  in  the 
way  of  a  prompt  and  favorable  report.  Accustomed 
to  command,  his  zeal  and  determination  became  the 
greater  at  the  unexpected  opposition.  He  sent  to 
the  Senate  special  messages  urging  ratification,  and 
proceeded  to  exert  executive  pressure  upon  individ 
ual  members  of  the  committee  and  other  senators 
to  a  degree  before  entirely  unknown.  He  went  re 
peatedly  to  the  Capitol  and  on  a  single  day  sum 
moned  fourteen  senators  to  meet  him.  Babcock 
appeared  before  the  committee  to  answer  inquiries. 
On  March  15th,  the  day  following  one  of  Grant's 
most  urgent  messages,  the  committee  presented  an 
adverse  report,  in  which  five  members  concurred  ; 
only  two  dissented. 

Nine  days  later  the  debate  on  the  San  Domingo 
question  was  opened  by  Sumner.  In  a  four-hour 
speech  he  set  forth  the  committee's  grounds  for  op 
posing  the  ratification  of  the  treaties.  Wishing  as 
far  as  possible  to  avoid  any  clash  with  the  adminis 
tration,  he  laid  no  emphasis  upon  the  unwarranted 


352  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

use  of  United  States  naval  power  in  Dominican 
waters  (upon  which  he  was  not  so  well  informed  as 
at  a  later  date)  and  he  was  careful  not  to  impugn  in 
the  slightest  respect  the  President's  motives  in  ur 
ging  annexation.  The  points  upon  which  he  did  lay 
stress  were  the  unsuitableness  of  the  Dominican  pop 
ulation  for  easy  assimilation  ;  the  bad  precedent  of 
annexation  toward  the  tropics,  with  the  probability 
of  complications  with  Hayti  ;  the  chronic  civil  war  to 
which  the  "  republic"  was  subject  ;  and  the  wrong  in 
volved  in  "  impairing  the  African's  predominance  in 
the  West  Indies.  '  '  The  treaties  were  before  the  Sen 
ate  for  three  months.  Meantime  the  President  again 
by  special  message  urged  their  ratification,  and  the 
Secretary  of  State  came  repeatedly  to  Sunmer's 
house  and  besought  him  to  support  the  treaties  be 
cause  the  President,  who  had  led  the  Eepublican 
party  to  victory,  had  them  so  much  at  heart.  In 
one  of  these  interviews  he  said  to  Sumner  :  "  Why 
not  go  to  London  ?  I  offer  you  the  English  mission  ; 
it  is  yours."  Sumner  secretly  resented  this  as  an 
attempt  to  silence  him,  and  replied  :  "  We  have  a 
minister  who  cannot  be  bettered."  !  But  no  un 
worthy  motive  need  be  attributed  to  Fish  ;  the 
appointment  would  have  placed  his  old-time  friend 
in  a  congenial  position  of  great  honor  and  influence 
and  have  secured  peace  to  the  administration. 


1870,  a  few  weeks  before  the  rejection  of  the  treaty. 
Rumner  adds  to  his  account  :  "Thus  already  did  the  mission  to 
London  begin  to  pivot  on  San  Domingo."  Works,  Vol.  XIV, 
p.  260. 


THE  SAN  DOMINGO  ISSUE  363 

There  was  little  popular  sentiment  in  favor  of  an 
nexation,  and  Summer  was  at  no  time  doubtful  as  to 
the  outcome.  On  the  last  day  of  June  the  vote  was  ta 
ken  and  resulted  in  a  tie,  twenty- eight  to  twenty  - 
eight,  so  that,  lacking  the  requisite  two-thirds,  the 
treaties  were  rejected.  The  very  day  after  this  vote, 
by  direction  of  the  President,  Motley's  resignation 
was  requested.  He  refused  to  give  it,  and  some 
months  later  was  summarily  removed.  There  was 
little  doubt  in  any  quarter  that  his  removal  was  due 
primarily  to  Grant's  resentment  at  Sumner' s  oppo 
sition  to  the  San  Domingo  treaties  in  the  Senate. 
Unable  to  hit  the  offender  in  person,  he  aimed  his 
blow  at  the  man  who  he  declared  "  represented  Sum- 
uer  more  than  he  did  the  administration."  In  cabi 
net  meeting  he  asserted  that  he  did  not  propose  to 
"  allow  Sumner  to  ride  over  him,"  and  when  it  was 
suggested  that  he  appoint  Sumner  to  the  English 
mission,  he  said  that  he  would  do  it  provided  Suni- 
uer  would  resign  from  the  Senate,  but  that  he  would 
remove  him  as  soon  as  his  appointment  had  been 
confirmed ! 


CHAPTER  XYII 

SUMNER  AND  GRANT  :  THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON 

DURING  the  recess  of  Congress,  Sumner  and  Fish 
continued  in  friendly  correspondence.1  But  months 
before  this, — in  fact,  within  a  few  weeks  of  the  time 
when  Motley  laid  down  the  law  to  Lord  Clarendon, — 
Fish  had  been  discussing  our  claims  against  Eng 
land  with  Sir  John  Eose,  ua  born  diplomatist," 
who,  as  a  member  of  the  Canadian  ministry,  had 
come  to  Washington  to  conduct  some  other  negotia 
tions.  The  British  government  was  at  last  suffering 
from  conviction  of  sin,  and  disposed  to  show  forth 
works  meet  for  repentance.  This  change  of  heart 
had  been  wrought  far  less  by  diplomacy  than  by  the 
logic  of  European  events.  In  July,  1870,  the 
Franco -Prussian  War  broke  out,  and  no  man  could 
tell  how  soon  England  might  be  involved  in  the 
turmoil.  In  these  anxious  days  she  found  herself 
fronted  by  the  precedents  which  she  had  so  recently 
established  during  the  war  in  America.  The 
thought  was  intolerable  that,  if  England  were  drawn 
into  the  war,  the  ports  of  a  neutral  would  be  open, 

JIn  private  correspondence,  however,  Fish  was  already 
sharply  critical.  June  23,  1870,  he  wrote  to  a  friend  :  "Clay 
and  Benton  each  domineered  in  their  day,  but  they  were  men 
capable  of  position;  the  aspirant  to  their  control,  in  the  present 
day,  knows  nothing  but  books,  and  not  overmuch  of  them." 
C.  F.  Adams,  The  Treaty  of  Washington,  p.  248. 


THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON       355 

without  possible  protest,  for  the  outfitting  of  ships 
of  war  to  prey  upon  her  commerce  on  every  sea. 
Fish  and  the  British  government  were  coming  closer 
together,  and  the  Secretary  of  State,  who .  had 
hitherto  remained  reluctantly  at  his  post  out  of  loy 
alty  to  his  friend,  the  President,  now  came  to  cher 
ish  an  honorable  ambition  that  he  might  bring  this 
long-standing  controversy  to  a  successful  issue.  In 
September,  1870,  he  wrote  to  a  friend  :  "  If  England 
can  be  brought  to  think  so  [that  she  was  drawn  into 
errors],  it  will  not  be  necessary  for  her  to  say  so,— 
at  least,  not  to  say  it  very  loudly.  It  may  be  said 
by  a  definition  of  what  shall  be  Maritime  Interna 
tional  Law  in  the  future,  and  a  few  kind  words. 
She  will  want  in  the  future  what  we  have  claimed. 
Thus  she  will  be  benefited — we  satisfied."  ! 

The  Secretary  repeatedly  suggested  to  the  British 
minister  a  comprehensive  settlement,  a  feature  of 
which  should  be  the  cession  of  Canada,  but  on  the 
very  day  that  the  allies  surrounded  Paris  came  the 
reply  that  although  England  would  gladly  be  rid  of 
the  Colonies,  it  was  impossible  for  her  to  force  in 
dependence  upon  them,  or  even  to  refer  the  ques 
tion  of  independence  to  a  popular  vote  of  the  people 
of  the  Dominion.  But  England's  predicament  did 
not  pass  unnoticed  by  her  Continental  neighbors  : 
the  Russian  minister  came  to  Fish  with  the  sugges 
tion  that  the  Franco- Prussian  War  was  affording  a 
most  opportune  time  for  pressing  our  claims  for  im 
mediate  settlement,  and  Fish  diplomatically  allowed 
1 C.  F.  Adams,  The  Treaty  of  Washington,  p.  126. 


356  CHARLES  SUMMER 

the  substance  of  this  interview  to  become  known  to 
the  British  minister,  who  thereupon  bluntly  asked 
him  what  the  United  States  wanted.  Fish  had  be 
come  convinced  that  the  unwillingness  of  the  Cana 
dians  to  separate  from  England  stood  as  an  insuper 
able  barrier  to  the  oft-discussed  plan  of  annexation. 
"  Like  the  wise  diplomat  he  was,  he  then  dropped 
the  unattainable  from  the  discussion  and  on  No 
vember  20,  1870,  asked  merely  an  expression  of  re 
gret  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain,  an  acceptable 
declaration  of  principles  of  international  law  and 
payment  of  claims." l 

Though  these  terms  were  much  more  moderate 
than  the  vague  intimations  heretofore  given,  Fish 
was  resolved  upoo  their  prompt  acceptance,  and  it 
was  at  his  instigation  that  in  the  President's  mes 
sage  there  were  inserted  those  vigorous  paragraphs 
relating  to  our  claims,  which  set  London  fuming 
over  the  implied  menace.  But  the  British  govern 
ment,  through  Sir  John  Rose,  promptly  intimated  a 
disposition  to  negotiate  on  the  proposed  basis,  and 
early  in  January  this  trusted  envoy  in  friendly 
converse  at  Fish's  table  was  discussing  preliminaries 
which  led  to  the  Treaty  of  Washington. 

The  President,  however,  was  adhering  pertina 
ciously  to  his  favorite  plan  ;  and  if  he  gave  Fish  a 
free  hand  in  dealing  with  England,  it  was  appar 
ently  upon  tacit  pledge  of  his  support  in  regard  to 
San  Domingo.  In  this  same  message,  dated  De 
cember  5,  1870,  Grant  pictured  in  most  fanciful 
'Rhodes,  Vol.  VI,  p.  355. 


THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON       357 

and  glowing  colors  the  advantages  of  annexing  the 
island,  which,  though  then  having  a  population  of 
only  about  120,000,  he  declared  "capable  of  sup 
porting  10,000,000  people  in  luxury."  He  argued 
that  its  acquisition  would  open  a  wide  market  for 
our  products,  and  expressed  the  conviction  that 
if  the  step  were  not  taken,  a  free  port  would 
speedily  be  negotiated  for  by  European  nations 
in  the  Bay  of  Samana ;  he  urged  Congress  to  au 
thorize  the  appointment  of  a  commission  to  nego 
tiate  a  treaty  by  which  the  "great  prize"  might 
be  secured.  This  was  recognized  to  be  impos 
sible,  but  a  friend  of  the  President  did  offer  a 
resolution  for  the  appointment  of  a  commission  of 
investigation. 

Then  was  the  time  for  silence  or  for  the  soft  an 
swer  on  the  part  of  Sumner.  It  was  morally  certain 
that  Congress  would  grant  nothing  more  than  a 
commission  of  inquiry.  But  in  Sumner's  opinion 
the  authorizing  of  such  a  commission  would  involve 
approval  of  grievous  violations  of  international  law 
and  threat  of  injury  to  the  race  of  which  he  had 
constituted  himself  the  champion.  Moreover,  he 
had  been  singled  out  for  attack  because  he  had  done 
what  he  conceived  to  be  his  duty  :  he  had  been 
struck  at  in  the  person  of  his  friend,  Motley,  who 
had  just  been  summarily  removed  from  the  English 
mission,1  and  the  plan  had  already  been  broached 

1  Motley  had  greatly  exasperated  both  Grant  and  Fish  by  the 
paper,  "The  End  of  the  Mission,"  which  he  had  sent  to  the 
State  Department. 


358  CHAELES  SUMNEK 

of  reconstituting  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Eela- 
tions  so  as  to  secure  its  favor  for  the  San  Domingo 
scheme.  The  antagonism  between  Grant  and  Sum- 
ner  had  reached  the  point  where  neither  could  be 
lieve  any  good  of  the  other.  Their  temperaments 
and  training  were  so  different  that  from  the  be 
ginning  they  had  appreciated  little  of  each  other's 
excellencies.1  As  Sumner  grew  older  he  became 
more  oracular  and  intolerant  of  opposition,  and  the 
extravagant  value  which  he  always  attached  to  liter - 

1  "Sumner  demanded,  as  the  prerequisite  of  agreeable  per 
sonal  intercourse,  adulation,  expressed  or  tacit ;  Grant  had  by 
1870  become  accustomed  to  receive  it,  but  had  not,  nor  ever 
•would  have,  the  power  to  give  it."  (W.  A.  Dunning,  Recon 
struction,  Political  and  Economic,  p.  165.)  The  widening  breach 
between  these  two  most  influential  men  in  public  life  was 
viewed  with  regret  and  grave  apprehension  as  to  its  conse 
quences.  Gerrit  Smith,  as  the  loyal  friend  of  both  men,  was 
induced  to  come  to  Washington  for  the  express  purpose  of  try 
ing  to  bring  them  together.  He  did  his  best,  but  had  to  ac 
knowledge  to  Andrew  D.  White,  at  whose  instance  he  had  made 
the  effort:  ''It  is  impossible  ;  it  is  a  breach  which  can  never 
be  healed."  (Autobiography  of  Andrew  D.  White,  Vol.  I,  p. 
485.)  Grant,  the  man  of  action,  seems  to  have  distrusted  Sum 
ner  as  a  man  of  words.  Once  asked  if  he  had  heard  Sumner 
converse,  he  replied,  ''No,  but  I  have  heard  him  lecture."  It 
is  said  that  upon  hearing  some  one  remark,  "  Mr.  Sumner  does 
not  believe  in  the  Bible,"  Grant  commented:  "No,  I  suppose 
not;  he  didn't  write  it,"  (G.  S.  Boutwell,  Sixty  Years  of  Pub 
lic  Life,  Vol.  II,  pp.  215,  251.)  Nevertheless,  there  is  evidence 
that  Grant  recognized  Summer's  power,  and  that  he  tried  to 
keep  on  friendly  terms  with  him.  Years  later,  in  1878,  James 
Eussell  Lowell  met  Grant  in  Spain,  and  one  of  the  things 
which  most  impreased  him  was  this:  "He  seemed  anxious 
to  explain  to  me  his  quarrel  with  Sumner — or  Sumner 's 
with  him.  '  Sumner  is  the  only  man  I  was  ever  anything 
but  my  real  self  to ;  the  only  man  I  ever  tried  to  conciliate 


iy  artincia 
II,  p.  233.) 


THE  TKEATY  OF  WASHINGTON       359 

ary  and  oratorical  achievements  led  him  to  regard 
with  something  of  disdain  as  well  as  distrust  the 
taciturn  soldier  whom  he  thought  now  sadly  out  of 
place  in  the  President's  chair.  Tale-bearers,  espe 
cially  those  of  Grant's  quasi-military  household,  had 
done  much  to  widen  the  breach  between  the  two. 
Sumner  was  even  credulous  enough  to  assert  his 
belief  that  his  life  had  been  threatened  at  the  White 
House,  a  statement  which  Morton  warned  him  not 
to  repeat,  unless  he  wanted  to  be  laughed  at.  Judge 
E.  Kockwood  Hoar,  one  of  Sumner' s  closest  friends, 
tells  of  visits  to  the  senator,  who  would  accompany 
him  to  the  door,  and  there,  as  he  grew  more  excited, 
would  shout  out  denunciations  of  the  occupant  of 
the  White  House,  just  across  Lafayette  Square,  his 
voice  rising  till  he  "  roared  like  a  bull  of  Bashan," 
so  that  "  it  would  at  times  seem  as  if  all  Washing 
ton,  including  Mrs.  Grant,  must  hear  and  the  police 
would  have  to  interfere."  And  this  feeling  was 
warmly  reciprocated.  George  F.  Hoar  was  walking 
along  the  street  in  earnest  conversation  with  the 
President  upon  official  business  when  suddenly 
Grant,  catching  sight  of  Sumner' s  windows,  broke 
out  with:  "That  man  who  lives  up  there  has 
abused  me  in  a  way  I  never  suffered  from  any  other 
man  living  !  "  and  he  shook  his  clenched  fist  at  the 
senator's  house. 

Under  such  circumstances,  perhaps  it  was  not  in 
human  nature  to  pass  over  the  President's  proposals 
in  silence.  Certainly  that  was  not  Sumner' s  course. 
When  the  resolution  for  the  commission  of  inquiry 


360  CHAELES  SUMNER 

came  before  the  Senate,  heedless  of  earnest  dissua 
sion  of  friends,  he  took  the  floor,  and  in  a  scathing 
speech — which  he  later  made  the  more  exasperating 
by  the  title,  "  Naboth's  Vineyard/' — he  denounced 
the  whole  San  Domingo  scheme.1  Its  key-note  was 
sounded  in  the  opening  sentence  :  "  The  resolution 
commits  Congress  to  a  dance  of  blood!"  In  con 
trast  with  his  earlier  discussion  of  the  matter,  he 
now  laid  chief  stress  upon  the  illegal  use  of  the 
American  navy  in  upholding  Baez,  and  the  mena 
cing  of  Hayti  both  by  our  war-ships  and  by  the  tone 
of  the  President's  message.  He  pointed  out  an 
analogy  between  the  President's  rumored  intention 
of  interfering  with  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Rela 
tions  and  Buchanan's  insistence  ftiat  Douglas  be 
removed  from  the  Committee  on  Territories,  in 
order  that  that  committee's  support  might  be  se 
cured  for  the  Lecomptou  Constitution.  His  speech, 
in  which  burned  again  all  the  fire  of  youth,  ac 
complished  nothing  but  increased  bitterness.  One 
of  his  greatest  admirers,  George  William  Curtis, 
who  believed  that  Sumuer's  points  were  well  taken, 
nevertheless  deplored  his  having  "  criticized  the 
administration  as  a  relentless  enemy  and  not  as  a 
friend"  at  the  very  time  when  it  was  "  of  the  ut 
most  importance  to  criticize  without  weakening  it." 
The  resolution,  amended  to  the  effect  that  it  "should 
not  be  understood  as  committing  Congress  to  the 
policy  of  annexing  San  Domingo,"  was  passed  by 
very  large  majorities,  and  the  Senate  promptly 
1  Dec.  21,  1870.  Works,  Vol.  XIV,  pp.  89-131. 


THE  TEEATY  OF  WASHINGTON       361 

confirmed  the  appointment  of  B.  F.  Wade,  S.  G. 
Howe,  and  A.  D.  White.1 

The  day  following  his  speech,  Sumner  dined  at 
the  house  of  Secretary  Fish  with  Senator  Morton, 
who  had  been  the  chief  advocate  of  the  annexation 
of  San  Domingo,  and  Sumner' s  outspoken  opposi 
tion  seemed  not  to  have  chilled  their  friendly  rela 
tions.  Nevertheless,  only  seven  days  later  (during 
which  no  new  occasion  of  difference  had  arisen) 
Hamilton  Fish  placed  on  record  in  an  official  docu 
ment  a  most  damaging  reflection  upon  the  integrity 
of  the  man  who  for  twenty  years  had  been  one  of 
his  most  intimate  friends.  On  January  9th,  in  re- 
spouse  to  a  request  from  the  Senate,  the  President 
sent  to  that  body  the  papers  relating  to  the  removal 
of  Motley.  Among  them  was  a  letter,  dated  De 
cember  30th,  to  the  secretary  of  the  legation  at 
London,  in  which  Fish  spoke  of  Grant  as  one  "  than 
whom  no  man  ...  is  more  sensitive  to  a  be 
trayal  of  confidence,  or  would  look  with  more  scorn 
and  contempt  upon  one  who  uses  the  words  of 
friendship  to  cover  a  secret  and  determined  policy 
of  hostility."  No  one  for  a  moment  doubted  to 
whom  reference  was  made. 

It  is  not  to  be  denied  that  in  recent  months  Sum 
ner  had  proved  hard  to  get  on  with,  but  how  Fish 

1  Agassiz  declined  a  place  upon  this  commission  because  of 
his  friendship  for  Sumner.  No  such  delicacy  deterred  Dr. 
Howe.  Dissent  over  this  San  Domingo  question  caused  an  es 
trangement  between  him  and  Sumner  which  was  never  to  be 
removed.  For  the  report  of  this  commission  and  the  close  of 
the  San  Domingo  controversy,  see  infra,  p.  373. 


362  CHAELES  SUMNEB 

could  have  allowed  a  not  unnatural  irritation  to 
betray  him  into  so  gross  an  injustice  to  a  friend  of 
many  years  is  as  incomprehensible  as  his  later  decla 
ration  that  he  was  u  not  conscious  of  any  just  cause 
for  the  discontinuing  of  the  relations  which  had 
existed  between  us  ! ' 7  \  At  the  time,  however,  he 
took  a  step  which  showed  clearly  that  he  believed 
their  friendly  relations  had  been  brought  to  an  end 
by  his  own  act.  The  prompt  sequel  of  the  Presi 
dent's  message,  with  its  "menacing"  discussion  of 
the  American  grievances  against  England,  was  the 
reappearance  in  Washington  of  Sir  John  Eose,  on 
January  9th,  the  very  day  the  Motley  papers  were 
sent  to  the  Senate,  and  his  discussions  with  Fish 
soon  reached  a  point  which  made  it  desirable  to 
consult  with  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Eelations.  Instead  of  coming  directly  to 
see  him,  as  had  been  his  frequent  custom,  Fish,  on 
January  12th,  asked  a  member  of  the  committee  to 
find  out  for  him  on  what  terms  he  stood  with  the 
senator.  Sumner  told  the  intermediary  that  he 
should  always  be  at  the  service  of  the  Secretary  for 
consultation  on  public  business,  but  that  he  could 
not  conceal  his  deep  sense  of  personal  wrong  re 
ceived  from  him,  absolutely  without  excuse.2  So 
an  official  interview  took  place,  on  January  15th, 
at  which  Fish  showed  Sumner  Sir  John  Eose's  con 
fidential  memorandum,  prepared  after  cable  com- 

1  Letter  to  Boston  Transcript,  Oct.  31,  1877. 

2  A  few  days  later,  at  a  dinner  where  both  were  guests,  Sum 
ner  ignored  Fish's  presence. 


THE  TBEATY  OF  WASHINGTON       363 

munication  with  the  Foreign  Office.  Sumner  de 
murred  at  expressing  an  opinion  as  to  the  answer 
which  should  be  given.  Fish  reminded  him  that 
he  had  come  officially  to  him  as  chairman  of  the 
Senate  Committee  on  Foreign  Eelations  to  ask  him 
his  opinion  and  advice,  and  that  he  was  entitled  to 
them,  since  he  must  give  an  answer.  Sumner  said 
that  the  matter  required  much  reflection,  but  that 
he  would  let  him  know  about  it  in  a  day  or  two. 
Accordingly,  two  days  later,  Fish  received  from 
Sumner  a  memorandum,  the  most  significant  part 
of  which  was  as  follows  : l  "  The  greatest  trouble, 
if  not  peril,  being  a  constant  source  of  anxiety  and 
disturbance,  is  from  Fenianisru  which  is  excited  by 
the  British  flag  in  Canada.8  Therefore  the  with 
drawal  of  the  British  flag  cannot  be  abandoned  as  a 
condition  or  preliminary  of  such  a  settlement  as  is 
now  proposed.  To  make  the  settlement  complete, 
the  withdrawal  should  be  from  this  hemisphere,  in 
cluding  provinces  and  islands."  3 

It  is  not  easy  to  understand  Sumner' s  motive  in 
framing  this  memorandum.     He  had  long  been  in 

1  The  memorandum  is  printed  in  full  in  J.  B.  Moore's  Inter 
national  Arbitrations,  Vol.  I,  p.  525. 

2  Fenianism  had  not  always  seemed  to  Sumner  so  appalling. 
April  3,  1866,  he  wrote  to  the  Duchess  of  Argyll  :    "  Fenianism 
is  to  us  only  a  noisy  shadow,  without  reality.     I  never  saw  a 
Fenian."     Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  276. 

3  This  memorandum  has  been  variously  regarded.     The  au 
thor  of  the  monumental  "  Memoir  "  of  Sumner  barely  mentions 
it,  evidently  not  deeming  it  significant  enough  to  quote.     On 
the  other  hand,  Mr.  C.  F.  Adams,  in  his  monograph,  The  Treaty 
of  Washington,   pp.  145-152,  finds  in  it  the  key  to  much  that 
followed. 


364  CHARLES  SUMNER 

favor  of  the  annexation  of  Canada,  yet  he  had  de 
clared  against  accessions  which  would  not  come  to 
the  United  States  with  the  free  assent  of  their  pop 
ulation,  and  he  could  not  have  failed  to  know  that 
at  that  time  the  people  of  the  Dominion  were  stren 
uously  opposed  to  the  transfer  of  sovereignty  which 
he  here  proposed  as  an  indispensable  "  condition  or 
preliminary"  to  the  settlement  of  the  pending 
controversy  with  England.  The  judgment  of  Mr. 
C.  F.  Adams,  the  most  painstaking  student  of  this 
chapter  of  American  diplomatic  history,  is  prob 
ably  the  most  logical : — that  by  stipulating  a  con 
dition  which  he  knew  to  be  impossible  of  fulfilment, 
Suinner  hoped  to  postpone  the  settlement  until  a 
time  when  Canadian  compliance  might  be  secured 
to  a  transfer  to  which  the  British  government  would 
have  already  gladly  assented. 

Fish  had  probably  scented  opposition  in  his  official 
interview  with  Sunnier,  for  that  very  day  he  went 
to  Morton,  the  leading  champion  of  the  administra 
tion's  San  Domingo  policy,  and  asked  him  whether 
he  thought  a  treaty  along  the  lines  proposed  could 
secure  ratification  in  case  of  Sumuer's  hostility,  to 
which  Morton  answered,  yes.  Fish  then  sought  out 
other  leaders,  Republican  and  Democratic,  and  re 
ceived  assurances  of  their  support  in  the  contingency 
suggested.  A  week  after  receiving  Sumner's  "  opin 
ion,"  Fish  had  a  conference  with  Sir  John  Rose, 
showed  him  in  confidence  Sumner's  tl  hemispheric 
flag-withdrawal  memorandum,"  as  Mr.  Adams  calls 
it,  and  assured  him  that  the  administration  would 


THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON       365 

use  every  endeavor  "  to  secure  a  favorable  result, 
even  if  it  involved  a  conflict  with  the  chairman  of 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  in  the  Senate."  l 
From  this  time  events  moved  fast  to  a  consummation. 
By  the  1st  of  February  the  British  minister  informed 
Fish  of  the  readiness  of  his  government  to  submit  the 
various  matters  of  difference  to  a  Joint  High  Com 
mission,  which  should  arrange  a  settlement  by  treaty. 
A  week  later  the  nominations  of  five  members  for  the 
United  States  were  sent  to  the  Senate  and  promptly 
confirmed  ;  and  on  the  27th  of  February  the  Joint 
High  Commission  was  organized  in  Washington. 

A  heavy  blow  was  now  awaiting  Sumner.  In  the 
debate  which  followed  his  speech  on  the  San 
Domingo  commission  resolution,  Conkling  had  de 
clared  that  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations 
"  ought  to  be  reorganized  so  that  it  should  no  longer 
be  led  by  a  virulent  opponent  of  the  administration," 
and  in  the  interval  before  the  beginning  of  the  next 
session  (March  4th)  such  a  change  came  to  be  con 
sidered  probable.  In  the  Republican  Senate  caucus 
a  committee,  the  majority  of  which  was  supposed  to 
be  against  the  removal  of  Sumner,  was  appointed  to 
bring  in  a  committee  list.  Suspicion  having  been 
aroused,  Allison  and  another  man  eager  for  party 
harmony,  called  upon  the  doubtful  member  of  the 
committee  and  found  him  inexorably  resolved  to 
recommend  Sumner' s  removal  ;  the  only  ground 
which  he  gave  for  his  stand  was  that  by  the  nature 
of  his  opposition  to  the  San  Domingo  treaty  the 

1  Moore,  International  Arbitrations,  Vol.  I,  pp.  528-530. 


366  CHARLES  SUMNEK 

senator  had  made  himself  offensive  to  the  President. 
The  committee,  accordingly,  named  Cameron  as 
chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Eelations,  and 
transferred  Sumner  to  the  Committee  on  Privileges 
and  Elections.  When  the  report  was  presented  in 
caucus,  Sumner  spoke  of  his  twelve  years  of  service 
upon  his  committee,  and  of  the  important  questions 
with  which  it  had  had  to  deal,  and  called  associates 
living  and  dead  to  testify  if  he  had  ever  failed  in 
any  duty  of  labor  or  patriotism.  He  declined  his 
new  committee  assignment  and  withdrew  from  the 
caucus.  Debate  followed,  but  the  committee's  list- 
was  sustained  by  a  vote  of  twenty-six  to  twenty-one.1 
In  the  Senate  the  motion  for  the  adoption  of  this  list 
gave  rise  to  long  and  acrimonious  debate.  Sumner 
asked  to  be  excused  from  the  unwelcome  duties  as 
signed  him,  and  his  request  was  granted.  Against 
their  will,  the  Eepublican  majority  were  forced  to 
give  reasons  for  the  proposed  removal.  The  only 
ground  alleged  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate  was  the 
fact  that  Sumner  was  not  on  speaking  terms  with  the 
President  and  the  Secretary  of  State,  although  his 
champions  boldly  asserted  that  this  was  but  "a 
flimsy  pretext "  and  that  "  the  San  Domingo  scheme 
was  at  the  bottom  of  the  whole  difficulty."  2  Even 
the  very  men  who  were  urging  Sumner' s  removal 

1  Elaine,  then  Speaker  of  the  House,  severely  condemned  this 
action.     "  Never  was  the  power  of  the  caucus  more  wrongfully 
applied."     He  discusses  it  in  detail  :     Twenty  Years  of  Congress, 
Vol.  II,  pp.  503-506. 

2  When  as  the  ground  for  the  proposed  action  it  was  alleged 
that  Sumner  had  "refused  to  hold  personal  intercourse  with  the 
Secretary  of  State,"  Schurz,  speaking  for  Sttmner,  declared  that 


THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON       307 

paid  glowing  tributes  to  his  merits  and  past  services, 
and  declared  that  "under  happier  circumstances  " 

be  could  fill  that  chairmanship  better  than  any  other 
senator.  Trumbull  earnestly  opposed  the  removal, 
saying  that  such  a  change  was  extraordinary  and  that 
according  to  established  usages  of  the  body,  chairmen 
"were  not  changed  contrary  to  their  expressed 
wishes. ' '  Though  bowing  to  the  will  of  the  majority, 
Sherman  declared :  "I  regard  this  change  as  uuj  usti- 
fiable,  as  impolitic,  as  unnecessary,  and  ...  no 
reason  has  been  given  which  ought  to  weigh,  in  my 
judgment,  to  induce  the  change. ' '  But  no  protest  was 
of  any  avail ;  the  removal  was  carried,  only  the  votes 
of  nine  Democrats  being  recorded  against  it.1  Per 
haps  the  least  favorable  light  is  thrown  on  this  transac 
tion  by  the  choice  of  Cameron  as  Sumner's  successor.2 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Grant's  resentment 

Sninner  had  not  refused  to  enter  into  any  official  relations, 
either  with  the  President  or  with  the  Secretary  of  State,  but 
had  said  that  he  would  "  receive  Mr.  Fish  as  an  old  friend,  and 
would  not  only  be  willing  but  would  be  glad  to  transact  such 
matters  and  discuss  such  questions  as  might  come  up  for  con 
sideration."  And  Sumner  added:  "  In  his  own  house.'" 
Blaine,  Vol.  II,  p.  504.  Two  other  grounds,  alleged  years  later 
in  the  mass  of  controversy  to  which  this  action  gave  rise,  viz., 
default  in  reporting  treaties  referred  to  his  committee,  and 
failure  to  ' '  move  forward  treaties  "  in  the  Senate,  may  be  dis 
missed  as  wholly  unsustained  by  the  evidence.  To  a  third,  at 
tention  is  directed  below,  p.  368. 

1  See  also  John  Sherman's  Recollections,  Vol.  I,  pp.  470-473. 

1  "  The  real  motive  of  the  removal  was  shown  past  all  ques 
tion,  when  to  this  place  of  highest  dignity  and  importance  there 
was  appointed  a  man  whose  long  public  record  was  a  story  only 
of  intrigue  and  suspected  corruption,  and  whose  sole  recom 
mendation  lay  in  being  a  servile  partisan  of  the  President." — 
G.  S.  Merriam,  Life  and  Times  of  Samuel  Bowles,  Vol.  II,  p.  131. 


368  CHARLES  SUMMER 

found  a  vindictive  satisfaction  in  this  deposition  of 
Simmer  from  the  position  which  was  his  pride  and 
glory.  Yet  it  would  be  an  injustice  to  Fish  not  to 
consider  the  strongest  argument  which  has  been  ad 
vanced  in  justification  of  the  pressure  exerted  by  the 
administration  to  secure  Sumner's  removal.  The 
Secretary,  as  we  have  stated,  had  given  pledge  to 
the  representative  of  the  British  government  that  no 
pains  would  be  spared  to  secure  a  settlement  upon 
terms  which  had  in  general  been  accepted  as  the 
basis  for  agreement,  "  even  if  it  involved  a  conflict 
with  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations,"  and  in  consequence  the  Joint  High 
Commission  was  already  in  session.  Yet  Sumner 
had  proposed  "  hemispheric  flag-withdrawal"  as  an 
indispensable  "  preliminary  "  to  any  complete  set 
tlement.  It  is  absurd  to  take  the  ground  that  Sum 
ner  was  here  speaking  figuratively  or  expressing 
merely  an  aspiration,  with  a  view  to  testing  public 
sentiment.  Charles  Sumner  gave  this  answer  to  the 
Secretary  of  State,  with  whom  he  was  hardly  on 
speaking  terms,  and  who  in  official  capacity  had 
asked  of  him,  also  in  official  capacity,  his  opinion 
and  advice.  Sumner  had  requested  time  to  deliber 
ate,  and  after  two  days  had  sent  this  answer  in  writ 
ing.  It  is  highly  significant,  also,  that  this  me 
morial  was  almost  in  the  precise  language  which  Sum 
ner  had  used  eighteen  months  before  in  an  elaborate 
communication  to  Motley,  giving  his  forecast  of  the 
terms  upon  which  the  settlement  might  take  place.1 
1  Letter  of  June  15,  18G9.  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  410. 


THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON       369 

This  ominous  reply  had  been  communicated  to 
the  British  eiivoy  and  to  a  number  of  senators. 
They  were  warranted  in  believing  that  Suiuner 
meant  precisely  what  he  said,  and  that  in  com 
mittee  and  in  the  Senate  he  would  prove  an  un 
yielding  obstructionist  to  the  settlement  which  the 
administration  had  pledged  itself  to  promote.  It  is 
a  legitimate  question  whether  the  Senate  precedent 
which  Trurnbull  said  required  that  no  committee 
chairman  should  be  changed  contrary  to  his  ex 
pressed  wish,  was  not  seriously  out  of  accord  with 
any  tenable  theory  of  party  responsibility,  and 
whether  the  experience  of  the  past  forty  years  has 
not  offered  repeated  instances  where  the  good  of  the 
party  and  of  the  country  as  well  would  have  been 
furthered  by  changes  in  the  chairmanships  contrary 
to  the  wishes  of  the  incumbents.  Because  of  the 
Senate's  share  in  treaty-making,  the  accord  between 
the  administration  and  the  chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations  becomes  a  matter  of 
unique  importance.  Often  it  lies  in  the  power  of 
that  one  man  to  make  or  mar  its  whole  foreign 
policy.  It  was  the  full  consciousness  of  this  fact 
which  had  called  from  Fish  that  pathetically  deferen 
tial  letter  to  Sumner  before  assuming  his  post  in  the 
cabinet.  Sumner  just  at  this  time  had  been  show 
ing  his  unrelenting  power  of  obstruction  in  the  case 
of  treaties  which  the  administration  had  earnestly 
sought  to  secure.  Far  greater  issues  were  now  at 
stake.  Fish  saw  within  his  grasp  an  honorable  set 
tlement  of  the  grievances  which  for  many  years  had 


370  CHABLES  SUMNEE 

kept  alive  rancor  and  ill-will  between  the  two 
branches  of  the  English-speaking  race,  provided  the 
result  of  his  negotiations  could  be  put  before  the 
Senate  in  such  a  way  as  to  command  the  normal 
party  support.  In  the  view  of  one  of  the  keenest  Eng 
lish  publicists,  "Fish  was  mortally  afraid  of  Sum- 
ner."  l  If  Fish  believed  that  Sunnier,  as  chairman 
of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Eelatious,  would  seri 
ously  menace  or  delay  the  final  ratification  of  the 
treaty  which  now  bade  fair  to  become  the  fulfilment 
of  hopes  long  deferred,  in  the  opinion  of  the  present 
writer  he  was  not  only  justified  in  exerting  pressure 
to  procure  his  removal,  but  failure  to  do  so  would 
have  shown  a  lack  of  good  faith  as  to  the  pledge  he 
had  given  the  British  government  and  not  less  a 
lack  of  appreciation  of  the  responsibility  which 
rested  upon  him  as  the  diplomatic  representative  of 
the  United  States  to  secure  for  his  country  peace 
with  honor. 

Sunmer's  removal  was  a  step  that  was  deeply  to 
be  deplored.  For  twelve  years  he  had  served  his 
country  well.  In  distinguished  qualifications  for  the 
high  station  he  occupied,  he  was  without  a  peer 
among  men  in  public  life — except  in  the  peculiar 
conditions  which  had  now  arisen.  That  he  was  no 
longer  on  speaking  terms  with  the  President  and 
the  Secretary  of  State — a  point  unduly  emphasized 
in  the  debates,  since  diplomatic  reserve  while  the 
Joint  High  Commission  was  in  session  required 
that  the  weightier  reason  be  kept  out  of  sight — was 
1  John  Morley,  Life  of  Gladstone,  Vol.  II,  p.  402. 


THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON       371 

far  less  to  his  discredit  than  to  that  of  Grant  and  of 
Fish.  So  far  forth,  Sunnier  merits  sympathy  in 
this  misfortune  which  was  to  shadow  and  embitter 
the  few  remaining  years  of  his  life.  But  by  his  ut 
terly  impracticable  insistence  upon  "  hemispheric 
flag- withdrawal, "  by  his  long  record  of  pertinacious 
obstruction  in  the  Senate,  and  by  his  growing  in 
firmities  of  temper,  in  large  measure,  Suinuer  drew 
this  misfortune  upon  himself.1 

1  This  removal  of  Su inner  from  the  chairmanship  has  occa 
sioned  a  vast  deal  of  controversy.  The  views  above  expressed 
accord  in  the  main  with  the  conclusions  of  Mr.  Charles  Francis 
Adams,  whose  Treaty  of  Washington  is  the  most  comprehensive 
study  of  the  issues  involved.  E.  L.  Godkin  discussed  the 
matter  in  a  fair-minded  editorial,  N.  Y.  Nation,  March  16, 
1871.  In  his  Memoir  of  Sumner,  Mr.  E.  L.  Pierce  gives 
an  inordinate  amount  of  space  to  this  affair.  He  bitterly 
arraigns  Grant  and  Fish  for  their  persecution  of  Sumuer, 
barely  refers  to  his  celebrated  "Memorandum,"  and  seems 
to  me  altogether  to  underestimate  the  menace  of  Sumner's 
probable  opposition  to  the  pending  negotiations.  Mr.  J.  F. 
Rhodes  attaches  nearly  as  much  importance  as  does  Mr. 
Adams  to  .Sumner's  mistakes  in  his  Johnson-Clarendon  speech 
and  in  his  "Memorandum,"  yet  declares  that  Grant's  insistence 
on  Sumner's  deposition  "  must  go  down  in  history  unjustified,1' 
and  attributes  it  to  "pure  vindictiveuess,"  adding,  ''If  it  was 
done  as  a  matter  of  policy  or  supposed  necessity,  the  policy  was 
mistaken  and  the  necessity  unreal," — a  judgment  which  seems 
to  me  unwarranted.  J.  C.  B.  Davis,  in  "Mr.  Fish  and  the 
Alabama  Claims,"  presents  much  special  pleading  in  behalf  of 
Fish  ;  some  of  his  points  are  demolished  by  Pierce's  criticism. 
The  most  successful  championship  of  Sumner's  cause  has  come 
from  ex-Governor  D.  H.  Chamberlain,  whose  paper,  "Charles 
Sumuer  and  the  Treaty  of  Washington, "  should  be  read  as  a 
critique  of  Mr.  Adams's  monograph.  He  insists  that  in  his 
"  Memorandum  "  Sumuer  had  no  reason  to  suppose  he  was  tak 
ing  ground  which  had  been  abandoned  by  Grant  and  Fish  ;  that 
if  this  "  Memorandum  "  liad  been  considered  of  much  impor 
tance,  it  would  have  been  brought  into  the  Senate  debates;  that 
at  the  time  of  his  removal,  he  had  given  no  sign  of  an  intention 


372  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

During  the  three  months  preceding  his  deposi 
tion,  documents  sent  to  the  Senate  upon  Sumner's 
call  had  revealed  more  clearly  the  methods  and 
incidents  involved  in  the  negotiation  of  the  San 
Domingo  annexation  treaties,  and,  against  the 
earnest  advice  of  his  friends,  Sumner  resolved  to 
bring  these  matters  to  the  attention  of  the  Senate. 
With  some  difficulty  he  secured  the  floor  for  the 
24th  of  March.  On  the  appointed  day,  long  before 
the  session  was  to  open,  thousands  strove  to  secure 
entrance  to  the  thronged  Senate  galleries ;  the 
House  adjourned  and  its  members  and  representa 
tives  of  the  diplomatic  corps  crowded  the  aisles  of 
the  Senate  chamber,  so  keen  was  the  interest  in  the 
anticipated  onslaught  of  Sumner  upon  the  adminis 
tration  from  whom,  as  many  believed,  he  had  suf 
fered  grievous  injustice.  It  was  the  very  day  upon 
which  the  San  Domingo  commissioners  were  ex 
pected  to  reach  Washington,  fresh  from  their  field 
of  investigation  ;  but  Sumuer  considered  their  re 
port  a  foregone  conclusion,  and  immaterial  to  the 
matters  he  had  on  his  mind.  For  three  and  a  half 

to  obstruct  the  progress  of  negotiations  for  a  treaty  which  were 
then  under  full  headway.  He  ridicules  the  idea  that  Suraner's 
influence  could  have  defeated  the  treaty,  and  on  various  other 
points  "  takes  the  negative  "  with  great  spirit.  Sumner's  own 
account  of  this  unfortunate  controversy  is  to  be  found  in  an 
elaborate  "Statement  "  as  to  his  personal  relations  with  the 
President  and  Secretary  of  State.  This  was  prepared  for  pres 
entation  in  the  Senate  in  March,  1871,  but  Sumner  decided  to 
withhold  it.  Accordingly,  though  printed  and  distributed 
privately,  it  was  not  published  till  after  Snmner's  death,  when 
F.  W.  Bird  sent  it  to  the  New  York  Tribune,  in  which  it  ap 
peared  April  6,  1874.  —  Works,  Vol.  XIV,  pp.  254-276. 


THE  TEEATY  OF  WASHINGTON       373 

hours  he  spoke  with  great  solemnity  and  without 
personal  bitterness.  He  did  not  concern  himself 
with  the  expediency  of  annexation,  but  brought  de 
tailed  evidence  from  official  documents  to  uphold 
his  assertions  that  the  force  of  the  American  navy 
had  been  made  to  serve  as  the  sole  support  of  Baez 
and  as  a  menace  to  Hayti.  His  auditors  were  sur 
prised  that  Surnuer  did  not  refer  to  his  removal 
from  his  committee  nor  make  mention  of  current 
charges  against  the  President  on  the  score  of  nepo 
tism  and  gift-taking.  In  one  passage  it  was  thought 
that  he  allowed  resentment  to  induce  him  to  bring 
unjust  imputations  against  Grant : — in  a  compari 
son  between  the  President's  use  of  the  war  vessels 
and  the  Ku  Klux  outrages,  with  the  implication 
that  a  proper  use  of  energies  abused  in  the  annexa 
tion  enterprise  might  have  prevented  or  have  put  a 
speedy  stop  to  Southern  outbreaks.  This  passage 
was  an  ill-considered  and  unworthy  afterthought, 
regretted  by  his  friends.  Somewhat  lame  defense  of 
the  President's  acts  was  attempted  by  a  few  of  his 
adherents,  but  Schurz  strongly  upheld  Sunnier* s 
charges  as  to  the  illegal  use  of  naval  power. 

Ten  days  later,  the  President  transmitted  to  Con 
gress  the  report  of  the  commission  of  inquiry.  It 
was  in  general  favorable  to  annexation,  though 
without  recommendation.1  Since  it  had  become 
certain  that  the  votes  necessary  for  annexation  by 

1  "Senator  Wade  was  favorable  to  annexation  on  account  of 
his  'manifest  destiny  '  ideas.  Dr.  Howe  was  in  favor  of  it  in 
view  of  various  philanthropic  considerations.  Neither  of  these 
views  affected  my  opinion,  but  I  was  influenced  later,  some- 


374  CHARLES  SUMNER 

treaty  or  by  joint  resolution  could  not  be  secured, 
here  ended  the  President's  dream  of  adding  to  the 
United  States  a  new  commonwealth  in  the  Indies. 
The  history  of  the  San  Dominican  ' i  republic ' '  during 
the  past  forty  years  has  shown  little  basis  for  the 
vision  which  captivated  Grant's  imagination.1 

what,  by  the  view  taken  by  President  Grant  in  a  conversation 
after  the  matter  was  virtually  settled,  to  the  effect  that,  in  case 
of  anything  approaching  a  racial  war  between  the  white  people 
of  the  South  and  the  freedmen,  Santo  Domingo  might  be  useful 
as  giving  the  blacks  such  an  opportunity  for  colonization  that 
they  could  make  terms  with  the  ruling  race,  who  might  be  more 
favorably  inclined  to  a  compromise  on  seeing  that  they  might 
be  largely  deprived  of  their  best  laborers,  should  the  latter  have 
an  opportunity  to  emigrate  to  a  semi-tropical  country  under  the 
American  flag."  Of  the  commissioners  two  favored  a  report 
advocating  annexation  ;  Mr.  White,  however,  prevailed  upon 
them  to  accept  his  view  that,  as  Congress  had  asked  only  for 
facts,  advice  from  the  commission  would  under  the  circum 
stances  be  an  impertinence.  (Autobiography  of  Andrew  D. 
White,  Vol.  I,  p.  506.)  In  a  letter  to  the  writer  (March  11, 
1909),  Mr.  White  states  his  personal  attitude  on  the  question  of 
annexation.  "My  feeling  regarding  any  annexation  was  one 
of  doubt, — of  suspended  judgment.  I  was  by  no  means  anx 
ious  to  try  the  experiment,  but  felt  that  if  there  was  an  Ameri 
can  majority  in  favor  of  trying  it,  the  Spanish  part  of  Santo 
Domingo,  under  the  circumstances,  afforded  the  best  oppor 
tunity  to  do  so  safely,  since  it  was  very  sparsely  populated  and 
all  its  leaders  of  opinion  favorable  to  coming  under  the  sway  of 
the  United  States." 

1  Grant  never  escaped  from  the  glamour  of  this  San  Domingo 
project.  On  almost  the  last  page  of  his  Personal  Memoirs  he 
recurs  to  it,  saying  that  he  was  chiefly  led  to  urge  annexation 
with  a  view  to  the  settlement  of  the  race  question  in  the  United 
States  (Memoirs,  Vol.  II,  p.  393).  He  adds  :  "San  Domingo  was 
freely  offered  to  us  not  only  by  the  administration  but  by  all  the 
people,  almost  without  price.  The  island  is  upon  our  shores,  is 
very  fertile,  and  is  capable  of  supporting  fifteen  millions  of 
people."  Dr.  Howe's  forecast  was  even  more  glowing:  "In 
no  case  can  the  cost  to  the  United  States  exceed  $1,500,000. 
But  were  it  a  hundred  millions,  it  would  be  cheaper  than  Alaska 


THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON       375 

One  of  the  most  painful  features  of  Simmer's  re 
moval  from  his  chairmanship  was  that  it  put  out  of 
a  position  of  high  influence  the  one  man  in  the  Sen 
ate  best  fitted  by  education  and  culture,  by  knowl 
edge  of  European  and  particularly  of  English  poll- 


at  a  hundred  cents.  [The  price  paid  to  Russia  for  Alaska  was 
$7,200,000.  In  the  year  1907,  Alaska's  output  of  gold  alone 
amounted  to  $18,4fe>9.400  or  more  than  two  and  one-half  times  the 
total  cost  of  Alaska.]  Cheaper  than  Alaska?  Why,  Santo  Do 
mingo  is  worth  more  to  us  than  even  Cuba  would  be.  Less 
extensive,  it  is  more  fertile,  more  salubrious,  richer  in  agri 
cultural  and  mineral  resources,  and  more  felicitous  in  geo 
graphical  position." 

The  anticipations  of  neither  party  to  this  old  controversy 
have  been  fulfilled.  No  European  power,  after  our  "folly  in 
rejecting  so  great  a  prize,"  made  haste  to  acquire  it,  or  even  to 
secure  a  free  port  on  the  Bay  of  Samana.  Its  population,  then 
estimated  by  the  Ecclesiastical  Court  at  207,000,  and  by  the 
commission  at  not  more  than  150,000,  had  reached  only  about 
416,000,  in  1907.  Its  government  continued  turbulent,  and 
bankruptcy  and  repudiation  seemed  about  to  lead  to  interven 
tion  of  European  powers  when,  by  the  convention  relating  to 
Dominican  finances,  ratified  in  March,  1907,  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States  was  made  Receiver  General  of  Customs,  charged 
with  the  responsibility  of  apportioning  a  fixed  proportion  of 
the  revenues  among  foreign  creditors. 

Hayti  retained  the  uninenaced  independence  which  Sumner 
was  eager  to  assure  her.  She  has  paid  the  interest  on  her  bonds 
and  kept  out  of  serious  quarrels  with  foreign  powers,  but  she 
has  shown  little  capacity  for  self-government.  If  Hayti's  ex 
hibition  of  what  the  negro  race  can  do,  when  left  to  work  out 
its  own  governmental  salvation,  is  to  be  accepted  as  representa 
tive,  it  falls  far  short  of  fulfilling  Sumner's  dream.  Hayti  has 
never  known  a  president  who  was  anything  else  than  a  dictator  ; 
her  revolutions  are  numbered  by  the  dozen.  As  late  as  Decem 
ber,  1908,  one  dictator  was  deposed  by  another,  with  a  ragged 
army  at  his  heels,  and  rioting  and  pillage  and  bloodshed  fol 
lowed.  Yet  there  is  a  gleam  of  hope  in  the  despatch  from  the 
American  minister  to  Hayti:  "The  revolution  was  one  of  the 
most  orderly  that  has  occurred  in  Hayti  for  many  years." — 
Outlook,  Dec.  12,  1908,  p.  804. 


376  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

tics  and  public  men,  and  by  study  of  international 
law  to  work  congenially  with  the  Joint  High  Com 
mission  in  negotiating  a  treaty  of  first  importance 
with  Great  Britain.  Two  of  the  British  commis 
sioners  presented  letters  of  introduction  to  Suinuer. 
Though  brought  into  no  official  relations,  both  policy 
and  congeniality  led  the  commission  to  make  much  of 
him.  He  was  often  consulted  by  its  members  ;  the 
British  minister  dined  them  with  Sumuer  as  the  only 
other  guest  j  upon  their  intimation  that  such  an  invi 
tation  would  be  acceptable,  Sumner  entertained  the 
commissioners  and  their  wives  at  an  elaborate  ban 
quet  ;  and  the  following  night  the  men  returned 
to  dine  with  Sumner,  their  deliberations  lasting  into 
the  small  hours.  Judge  Hoar  came  to  him  fre 
quently  for  conference,  and  when  the  treaty  was 
finally  signed,  on  May  8th,  brought  to  Sumner1  s 
house  the  first  available  copy,  inscribed  :  "  The  re 
sult  of  long  and  earnest  labor  is  presented  and  dedi 
cated  with  respect  and  confidence  by  his  friend, 
E.  E.  Hoar." 

Much  curiosity  and  some  apprehension  were  felt 
as  to  the  attitude  which  Sumner  would  take  toward 
the  treaty,  for  he  declined  to  commit  himself,  until 
he  spoke  in  the  Senate.  Though  no  longer  in  his 
former  position  of  authority,  he  could  nevertheless 
exercise  great  powers  of  obstruction  and  opposition 
in  that  body.  It  was  by  no  means  certain  that  he 
could  not  at  least  force  amendments  which  would 
make  the  treaty  unsatisfactory  to  the  British  gov 
ernment  ;  and,  if  he  chose  to  attempt  to  arouse 


THE  TKEATY  OF  WASHINGTON       377 

public  sentiment,  it  was  believed  that  he  might 
work  upou  Fenianism — to  which  he  had  himself 
already  given  great  prominence,  in  his  "  Memoran 
dum,"  as  a  force  to  be  reckoned  with — so  strongly  as 
to  bring  enough  outside  pressure  to  bear  upon  sena 
tors  to  defeat  the  treaty's  ratification.  The  British 
commissioners  stayed  iu  Washington  for  some  time 
after  the  signing  of  the  treaty,  frankly  avowing  to 
the  home  government  that  they  deemed  it  best  to 
remain  where  they  could  be  in  touch  with  certain 
influential  leaders  of  the  Senate.  They  were  assidu 
ous  iu  attentions  to  Sumner,  and  in  acknowledg 
ments  of  his  assistance  and  courtesies.  Sir  Stafford 
Northcote  declared:  "We  have  paid  him  a  good 
deal  of  attention  since  he  has  been  deposed,  and  I 
think  he  is  much  pleased  at  being  still  recognized  as 
a  power."  !  Sumner  confided  to  Lieber  :  "  Lord  de 
Grey  told  me  that  without  my  speech  [on  the  John 
son-Clarendon  Convention]  the  treaty  could  not  have 
been  made  and  that  he  worked  by  it  as  by  a  chart." 
To  the  great  relief  of  the  administration,  Sumner 
not  only  gave  to  the  treaty  his  vote,  but  made  the 
principal  speech  in  its  exposition  and  support.  To 
his  friends  he  declared  that  every  point  he  had 
urged  against  the  earlier  convention  was  met  by  this 
treaty.2  It  did  not  make  our  cause  "a  mere  bundle 

1  Long,  Northcote,  Vol.  II,  p.  23. 

"An  examination  of  its  provisions,  in  relation  to  the 
Alabama  question,  will  show  that  they  substantially  meet  the 
requirements  of  his  [Simmer's]  speech  on  the  Johnson -Claren 
don  Convention."— J.  B.  Moore,  International  Arbitrations, 
Vol.  I,  p.  553. 


378  CHAKLES  BUHNER 

of  individual  claims,"  but  comprehended  "  all  com 
plaints  and  claims"  ;  it  did  not  allow  auy  choice 
of  arbitrator  by  lot;  it  expressed  "in  a  friendly 
spirit  the  regret  felt  by  Her  Majesty's  government" 
for  the  escape  of  the  cruisers  and  the  damage  they 
wrought ;  it  declared  as  binding  both  in  the  pend 
ing  case  and  for  the  future  such  "due  diligence" 
as  would  require  a  neutral  power  to  "  prevent  the 
fitting  out  or  assisting  of  belligerent  vessels  in  its 
ports,  and  to  prevent  its  ports  being  made  a  base  of 
naval  operations  by  one  belligerent  against  the 
other."  The  determination  of  the  amount  of  com 
pensation  was  assigned  to  an  arbitration  conference 
which  met  at  Geneva,  where  at  first  the  more  vigor 
ous  than  ingenuous  insistence  upon  Surnuer's  favor 
ite  idea  of  lt  national  claims" — claims  which  Fish 
declared  unfounded,  an  opinion  supported  by  the 
weight  of  more  recent  authorities, — came  near 
wrecking  the  whole  negotiation.1  Suinner  criti 
cized  the  vagueness  of  the  language  in  the  treaty 
which  led  to  this  later  controversy,  and  he  certainly 
would  not  have  given  his  assent  to  an  abandonment 
of  the  "national  claims,"  had  he  supposed  the 
treaty's  provisions  could  be  interpreted  as  sanction 
ing  such  a  course.  He  also  suggested,  but  did  not 
strongly  urge,  certain  amendments,  mainly  with  the 

1  "The  real  fact,  however,  would  seem  to  be  that  the  indirect 
claims  were  inserted  in  the  American  'case'  by  those  who  pre 
pared  it,  not  because  of  any  faith  in  them  or  hope  that  they 
might  possibly  be  entertained,  but  in  order  to  get  rid  of  them, 
and  as  a  species  of  political  estoppel." — $.  F.  Adams,  Jr.,  Life 
of  Charles  Francis  Adams,  p.  388. 


THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON       379 

intent  of  securing  more  precise  definition  of  the  du 
ties  of  neutrals  and  an  extension  of  the  immunity 
of  private  property  at  sea.  Although  he  had  de 
clared  the  withdrawal  of  the  British  flag  from  the 
Western  hemisphere  to  be  an  indispensable  pre 
liminary  to  a  complete  settlement,  he  advanced  no 
such  impracticable  suggestion  in  the  Senate.  He 
cheerfully  accepted  the  treaty  as  the  best  that  could 
be  gained,  and  declared  that  as  such  it  would  be 
"  hailed  with  joy  by  the  thinking  men  of  Great 
Britain  and  of  the  United  States. "  1 

For  the  sake  of  clearness,  the  narrative  of  the 
diplomatic  negotiations  of  Grant's  first  term,  in 
which  Sumner  was  so  vitally  interested,  has  been 
continued  to  this  point  without  interruption.  But 
during  these  four  years  Sumner  had  entered  into  the 
general  work  of  the  Senate  with  great  vigor.  He 
became  a  careful  student  of  financial  problems,  and 
frequently  took  part  in  the  debates,  especially  in 
protest  against  what  he  considered  an  attack  upon 
the  national  credit ;  he  continued  to  urge  the  speedy 
resumption  of  specie  payments  and  the  funding  of 

1  Wise  after  the  fact,  it  is  easy  for  the  historian  of  to-day,  in 
view  of  Simmer's  magnanimous  acceptance  of  the  commission's 
treaty,  to  declare  that  his  removal  from  his  chairmanship  was 
neither  politic  nor  necessary.  But  Fish  had  to  act  upon  the 
light  then  at  his  command.  As  Mr.  Moiiey  says,  Sumner  was 
then  believed  to  be  "  red-hot  against  England  "  ;  he  was  display 
ing  implacable  antagonism  to  the  President ;  his  "  Memorandum  " 
had  laid  down  an  impossible  "preliminary"  ;  and  in  twenty 
years  no  other  man  in  the  Senate  had  shown  such  pertinacity  in 
obstruction,  even  in  the  face  of  almost  unanimous  opposition. 
Fish  certainly  had  ample  ground  for  seeing  in  Sumner  a  serious 
menace  to  the  treaty. 


380 ,  CHARLES  SUMNER 

the  public  debt  into  long-term  obligations ;  he 
favored  the  simplification  of  the  internal  revenue 
system  and  the  abolition  of  the  income  tax.  He 
devoted  much  energy  to  securing  a  pension  for  Mrs. 
Lincoln,  succeeding  only  after  it  had  been  held  over 
from  one  Congress  to  another,  and  finally  carrying 
it  against  the  unanimously  adverse  report  of  the 
committee  to  which  it  had  been  referred.  Postal 
reform  aroused  his  interest  j  he  earnestly  believed 
in  making  the  postal  system  serve  as  a  great  educa 
tional  force  for  disseminating  knowledge,  and  di 
rected  much  effort  to  the  attempt  to  secure  lower 
rates  and  simpler  classifications. 

But  the  legislation  appealing  most  strongly  to 
him  was  that  which  related  to  reconstruction.  At 
the  beginning  of  Grant's  administration,  three  states 
still  remained  outside  the  pale,  and  Georgia,  after 
being  admitted  to  representation,  presently  pro 
ceeded  to  "  purge"  her  legislature  in  flagrant  viola 
tion  of  the  Reconstruction  Acts.  Sumuer  cooper 
ated  heartily  with  other  Republican  leaders  in  1870 
in  the  Act  for  reforming  the  legislature  of  Georgia, 
and  in  imposing  a  uniform  set  of  "  fundamental  con 
ditions"  upon  the  admission  of  Virginia,  Missis 
sippi,  and  Texas.  In  replying  to  colleagues  who 
denied  the  propriety  of  these  prohibitions  upon 
changes  in  state  constitutions  allowing  exclusions 
from  the  suffrage,  or  from  school  -privileges,  or  from 
office-holding,  on  account  of  race,  color  or  previous 
condition  of  servitude,  Sumner  again  exhibited  his 
characteristic  mode  of  constitutional  interpretation. 


THE  TKEATY  OF  WASHINGTON       381 

He  was  much  given  to  citing  the  Declaration  of  In 
dependence,  if  not  as  directly  conferring  powers 
upon  Congress,  at  any  rate  as  an  authoritative  guide 
in  the  interpretation  of  the  Constitution.  Limita 
tions  upon  the  powers  of  Congress  he  was  wont  to 
brush  contemptuously  aside,  when  he  thought  they 
stood  in  the  way  of  "  human  rights"  of  which  he 
conceived  himself  the  chief  defender  j  and  men  who, 
fearing  this  tendency  toward  centralization,  opposed 
placing  such  powers  in  the  hands  of  Congress,  he 
would  most  unjustly  but  vehemently  denounce  as 
the  lineal  descendants  of  nullifiers  and  secessionists. 

In  1870,  when  some  changes  in  the  naturalization 
laws  were  under  discussion,  Sumner  tried  to  secure 
the  passage  of  an  amendment  striking  out  the  word 
u  white,"  so  that  there  should  be  no  distinctions  of 
race  and  color  in  granting  admission  to  citizenship. 
This  amendment  was  defeated  largely  through  the 
influence  of  senators  from  the  Pacific  coast,  who 
were  opposed  to  the  extension  of  naturalization  to 
the  Chinese.  Sumner  had  no  fear  of  the  "  Yellow 
Peril."  In  his  view,  "a  returned  Chinaman  is 
worth  a  dozen  missionaries  ;  but  while  he  is  here,— 
if  he  does  not  return, — he  comes  under  our  influ 
ences,  he  shares  the  good  of  our  churches,  of  our 
schools,  and  if  you  will  let  him  he  will  grow  up  in 
the  glory  and  the  beauty  of  our  citizenship."  The 
only  change  made  at  this  time  was  an  amendment, 
at  Sumner's  instigation,  admitting  to  naturalization 
"  aliens  of  African  nativity  or  African  descent." 

The  wreck  of  Sumner's  hopes  of  domestic  hap- 


382  CHARLES  SUMNER 

piness  and  the  strain  of  the  prolonged  controversy 
with  the  administration  told  heavily  upon  him.  In 
February,  1871,  he  wrote,  "I  am  weary  and  old, 
and  much  disheartened  by  the  course  of  our  Presi 
dent,  who  is  not  the  man  we  supposed."  Later  in 
the  same  month,  for  the  first  time  in  a  dozen  years, 
he  suffered  from  a  return  of  the  angina  pectoris. 
Yet  despite  illness  and  depression,  he  found  strength 
for  some  literary  efforts  and  diversions.  As  a 
means  of  disseminating  his  views  on  civil  rights,  in 
1869  he  wrote  a  learned  disquisition  on  "  Caste," 
which  he  put  to  rather  inappropriate  use  as  a 
Lyceum  lecture,  delivering  it  in  eight  states.  In 
the  following  year  he  made  a  lecture  tour  from 
Massachusetts  to  Illinois,  presenting  sometimes  his 
address  on  "Lafayette"  but  more  frequently  a  lec 
ture  on  the  Franco -Prussian  War,  just  ended ;  in 
this  he  discussed  its  causes,  denounced  Louis  Napo 
leon,  and  emphasized  anew  his  views  on  the  enormi 
ties  of  war.  The  preparation  of  a  paper  on  "The 
Best  Portraits  in  Engraving ' '  gave  him  an  oppor 
tunity  to  follow  his  favorite  penchant  and  to  do  some 
congenial  work  upon  biographical  sketches  of  emi 
nent  engravers. 

In  1871  it  might  seem  that  Sunmer  had  become  a 
man  without  a  party.  He  had  opposed  certain 
favorite  measures  of  the  Republican  administration, 
and  had  been  deposed  by  Republican  votes  from  his 
commanding  position  in  the  Senate.  It  was  not 
known  how  he  would  align  himself  in  the  future. 
Nevertheless,  the  Republican  leaders  in  Massachu- 


THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON       383 

setts  found  themselves  obliged  to  appeal  to  him  in 
the  fall  of  this  year  as  the  one  man  whose  influence 
was  essential  to  save  the  commonwealth  from  the 
menace  of  General  Butler's  unprecedented  cam 
paign  for  the  governorship.  Stunner's  personal  re 
lations  with  Butler  had  not  been  unpleasant  and  it 
was  with  reluctance  that  he  consented  to  do  what 
was  laid  upon  him  as  a  duty  :  he  joined  with  Wilson 
in  a  declaration  that  Butler's  nomination  would  be 
4 '  hostile  to  the  best  interests  of  the  commonwealth 
and  of  the  Republican  party. ' '  This  act  was  thought 
to  be  the  turning-point  in  the  campaign.  If  it  lost 
Butler  the  nomination,  it  certainly  won  for  Sunmer 
a  bitter  and  vindictive  enemy. 


CHAPTER  XYIII 
SUMNER'S  PERSONALITY  AND  CHARACTERISTICS 

FOR  nearly  a  score  of  years  Charles  Sumner  was 
the  most  conspicuous  figure  in  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States.  In  body  as  well  as  in  mind  he  tow 
ered  among  his  colleagues.  In  manhood,  Sumner7  s 
height  was  six  feet  and  four  inches,  and  he  had  the 
frame  and  strength  of  a  giant.  In  his  youth  he 
swam  across  the  Niagara  River  just  below  the  Falls. 
His  broad  forehead  was  overhung  by  a  great  mass 
of  brown  hair.  His  eyes  were  of  a  deep  blue,  his 
nose  strong  and  aquiline,  his  mouth  large.  In  his 
college  days  his  features  seemed  too  heavy  for  his 
slight  frame,  but  in  his  prime  came  greater  fulness, 
which  gave  him  a  handsome,  manly  face  and  most 
commanding  presence. 

There  was  always  lacking  in  him  a  certain  supple 
ness  both  of  body  and  of  mind.  He  was  a  man  of 
great  erudition.  Extraordinary  as  were  his  intel 
lectual  powers,  they  were  not  of  the  highest  order  : 
they  were  acquisitive  rather  than  creative, — a  con 
trast  which  he  himself  seemed  to  draw  in  a  remark 
to  his  friend,  Colonel  T.  W.  Higginson,  in  relation 
to  some  demand  upon  him  which  he  thought  excess 
ive  :  ' '  These  people  forget  that  I  am  a  cistern, 
not  a  fountain,  and  require  time  to  fill  up. ' ' l  His 

1  Contemporaries,  p.  283. 


SUMNEK'S  PERSONALITY  385 

phenomenal  memory  put  the  harvest  of  his  years  of 
study  and  experience  at  his  instant  command.  The 
variety  and  fulness  of  his  information  often  led  the 
listener  to  misjudge  him.  Mrs.  Jefferson  Davis  has 
given  an  interesting  account  of  the  impression  Suin- 
ner  made  upon  those  who  did  not  get  below  the  sur 
face  in  their  knowledge  of  him  :  u  He  was  a  hand 
some,  unpleasing  man,  and  an  athlete  whose  physique 
proclaimed  his  physical  strength.  His  conversation 
was  studied  but  brilliant,  his  manner  deferential 
only  as  a  matter  of  policy  ;  consequently  he  never 
inspired  the  women  to  whom  he  was  attentive  with 
the  pleasant  consciousness  of  possessing  his  regard 
or  esteem.  He  was,  until  his  fracas  with  Mr.  Brooks, 
fond  of  talking  to  Southern  women,  and  prepared 
himself  with  great  care  for  these  conversational 
pyrotechnics,  in  which,  as  well  as  I  remember,  there 
was  much  Greek  fire  and  the  l  set  pieces '  were  nu 
merous  ;  he  never  intruded  his  peculiar  views  upon 
us  in  any  degree,  but  read  up  the  Indian  mutiny, 
lace,  Demosthenes,  jewels,  Seneca's  morals,  intag 
lios,  the  Platoniau  theory,  and  once  gave  me  quite 
an  interesting  resume  of  the  history  of  dancing." 

In  his  early  thirties  Sumiicr  became  one  of  the 
most  sought- for  lecturers  upon  the  Lyceum  platform, 
then  worthily  manned  by  the  leaders  of  American 
thought.  Here  to  his  kingly  presence  was  joined 
a  voice  remarkable  for  its  fulness  and  strength, — 
"  a  splendid  organ  :  the  diapason  was  there  in  tones 
full  and  rich  ;  yet  the  vox  humana  was  lacking." 

1  Memoirs  of  Jefferson  Davis,  Vol.  I,  pp.  557-558. 


386  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

His  enunciation  was  distinct  and  his  sentences  well- 
rounded.  He  allowed  himself  none  of  the  collo 
quialisms  or  clipping  of  words  which  brought  a 
greater  orator,  Wendell  Phillips,  into  more  intimate 
t  ouch  with  the  average  audience. 1  He  was  always 
11  full  of  matter."  His  speeches  grew  to  portentous 
length,  not  because  he  was  rambling  in  thought  or 
did  not  know  how  to  come  to  a  close,  but  because 
he  was  absorbed  in  his  theme  and  because  he  delib 
erately  cultivated  a  florid,  over-elaborated  style. 
Thus,  he  would  refer  to  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  as 
"most  cruel,  unchristian,  detestable,  devilish, 
heaven-defying  ;  setting  at  naught  the  best  principles 
of  the  Constitution  and  the  laws  of  God."  Though 
his  popular  lectures  ran  to  two  or  three  hours  in 
length,  he  was  intolerant  of  any  interruption.  If 
some  unfortunate  in  a  far  corner  of  the  audience, 
after  listening  to  the  speaker  for  two  full  hours, 
tried  to  steal  from  the  hall,  Sumner  would  stop 
short  in  his  discourse,  glower  at  the  offender's  every 
step,  and  even  continue  to  glare  for  many  heavy 
seconds  at  the  door  through  which  the  wretched  man 
had  made  his  embarrassed  exit. 

His  earlier  platform  addresses  and  speeches  were 
carefully  wrought  out  and  memorized,  and  then  de 
livered  without  notes  and  with  much  attention  to 
gestures  and  manner.  At  times,  however,  he  would 
forget  himself  in  his  theme  and  quite  shake  off  the 

Personal  recollections  of  Mr.  E.  Harlow  Russell.  For  vig 
orous  descriptions  of  Sumner's  oratory,  see  Independent,  July  19, 
1859,  by  Theodore  Tilton  ;  and  N.  Y.  ZVi&tme,  Nov.  16,  1859, 
by  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe. 


SUMNEE'S  PEKSONALITY  387 

conventions  of  the  orator,  as  when  in  his  Harvard 
Phi  Beta  Kappa  address  he  stood  with  his  back 
turned  to  the  audience,  while  he  was  directing  an 
impassioned  appeal  to  President  Quincy.  But  most 
of  his  speeches  smelled  of  the  lamp,  and  his  denun 
ciations  were  made  all  the  more  galling  by  the  be 
lief  that  the  invective  which  he  was  much  given  to 
pouring  upon  his  opponents  sprang  not  from  his 
tongue  in  the  heat  of  passion  but  had  been  carefully 
worked  up  and  committed  to  memory  in  the  quiet 
solitude  of  his  study.  His  speech  for  the  expulsion 
of  Bright  was  described  by  one  who  heard  it  as  "a 
lash  of  scorpions."  Few  men  in  so  strenuous  pub 
lic  service  have  found  so  much  time  or  inclination 
to  thumb  dictionaries  and  books  of  synonyms. 
"  Prophetic  Voices  concerning  America"  or  "  of 
America"? — this  was  the  question  upon  which, 
after  much  anxious  thought,  he  was  consulting  with 
the  Librarian  of  Congress  and  writing  to  Longfellow, 
on  the  very  last  day  of  his  life.  He  had  a  fondness 
for  preambles,  and  for  formal  pronunciamentos  of 
his  views.  He  often  showed  a  rare  skill  in  the 
choice  of  the  telling  phrase,  and  in  his  "  Freedom 
national,  Slavery  sectional,"  "The  Crime  against 
Kansas,"  "  The  Barbarism  of  Slavery"  he  forged 
weapons  that  were  splendidly  effective.  t  i  Naboth's 
Vineyard,"  as  the  title  of  his  speech  on  Grant's  San 
Domingo  policy,  was  perhaps  more  striking  and  of 
fensive  than  anything  in  the  arraignment  itself. 
Xo  charge  is  more  unjust  than  that  Surnner  ever 
spoke  as  a  mere  rhetorician,  yet  it  is  a  valid  criti- 


388  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

cism  that  he  was  "  too  often  the  slave  of  words  when 
he  thought  he  was  their  master. "  l  Thus  he  was 
led  into  an  extravagance  of  expression  at  times  quite 
at  variance  with  a  prosaic  "  unoratorical "  view  of 
the  facts.  As  we  have  seen,  at  the  beginning  of  his 
career,  he  could  write  to  Winthrop  with  earnest 
protestations  of  personal  friendship  and  regard,  and 
three  days  later  publish  a  scathing  arraignment  of 
that  congressman's  recent  vote  :  "  It  cannot  be  for 
gotten  on  earth  ;  it  must  be  remembered  in  heaven. 
Blood  !  blood  !  is  on  the  hands  of  the  representa 
tive  from  Boston.  Not  all  great  Neptune's  ocean 
can  wash  them  clean  ! ' '  Yet  Sumner  was  surprised 
that  Winthrop  should  see  cause  for  declaring  their 
personal  relations  at  an  end.  In  his  Faneuil  Hall 
speech  he  pictures  the  depths  of  infamy  to  which 
Fillmore  had  sunk  in  signing  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Bill  :  "  Better  for  him  had  he  never  been  born ! 
Better  for  his  name,  and  for  the  name  of  his  children, 
had  he  never  been  President!"  Yet  this  did  not 
prevent  his  showing  decided  pleasure,  a  few  months 
later,  at  athe  peculiarly  cordial  reception "  which 
Fillmore  gave  him  in  Washington.2  And  again,  to 
ward  the  close  of  his  life,  in  his  first  speeches  on  the 

1  John  Morley  thus  characterizes  him.     Life  of  Gladstone,  Vol. 
II,  p.  398. 

2  Dr.  Howe  wrote  to  Sumner  that  on  good  authority  it  was 
reported  that  Fillmore,    "in  answer  to  a  query  about  how  you 
could  seek  his  hospitalities  after  denouncing  him  so  bitterly, 
said.  'Mr.  Sumner  seems  to  like  me  pretty  well ;  at  any  rate,  by 
coming    to    my  house  he  shows  he   did   not    believe    what    he 
-said.'  "     May  11,  1852,    Journals   and   Idlers  of  8.  O.  Howe, 
Vol.  II,  p.  374. 


SUMMER'S  PERSONALITY  389 

San  Domingo  treaties,  although  Sunnier  protested 
that  he  had  spoken  only  in  kindliness,  his  words 
seemed  to  Grant  and  to  many  others,  so  charged 
with  imputations  against  the  President  as  to  place 
the  speaker  in  the  attitude  of  a  bitter  assailant  of 
his  motives  and  character.  In  these  very  years 
Sumner  was  being  made  the  victim  of  a  somewhat 
similar  failure  in  discrimination  to  that  which  he 
was  displaying.  In  1872  the  talented  editor  of 
Harper's  Weekly  found  it  necessary  to  rebuke  Thomas 
Xast  because  he  carried  over  into  his  caricatures  of 
Sumner  the  brutal  method  which  he  had  employed 
so  effectively  against  Tweed.  In  like  manner, 
Sumner' s  pen  and  tongue  became  so  accustomed  to 
denouncing  slavery  and  "  slave-mongers  "  that  they 
kept  the  same  furious  diction  when  condemning  the 
more  venial  faults  and  failings  of  Johnson  and 
Grant.  In  Sumuer's  later  years  this  lack  of  self- 
restraint  extended  from  his  words  to  his  manner, 
and  at  times  friends  noted  with  apprehension  his 
flushed  face,  trembling  voice,  and  seeming  irrespon 
sibility  for  the  almost  frenzied  words  he  was  uttering.1 
Aside  from  this  extravagance,  there  were  other 
qualities  in  Sumner' s  addresses  which  provoked 
criticism.  In  his  speeches  upon  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Law  there  was  a  frequent  elaboration  of  references  to 
slavery  as  the  " harlot"  or  the  "harpy,"  which 
gave  great  offense  to  Southern  hearers.  These  pas 
sages  are  not  pleasant  reading  to-day  ;  but  it  must 

1  Comments  by  Fish  and  Daua,  in  TJie  Treaty  of  Washington, 
pp.  173-176. 


390  CHARLES  SUMNER 

be  said  that,  in  the  face  of  the  haughty  arrogance 
of  the  Southern  leaders,  it  was  Sumner's  deliberate 
purpose  to  exhibit  the  defilement  of  contact  with 
slavery,  and  his  plainness,  even  grossness,  of  speech 
found  justification  in  its  occasion  and  effect.  Sum- 
ner  never  appreciated  the  force  and  charm  of  brev 
ity  and  simplicity  ;  his  speeches  in  the  Senate  fre 
quently  exceeded  three  hours  in  length,  and  their 
embellishment  with  labored  alliterations,  and  with 
poetical  quotations,  especially  when  chosen  from 
the  Greek  and  Latin,  at  times  did  more  to  amuse 
than  to  convince  his  hearers.  For  a  writer  who 
concerned  himself  so  seriously  with  the  form  of  his 
expression,  Sumner  was  strangely  lacking  in  sensi 
tiveness  to  the  demands  of  unity  or  appropriateness 
to  the  occasion.  In  many  cases  doubtless  he  vio 
lated  these  demands  deliberately.  Delenda  est  Car 
thago  was  hardly  a  more  inevitable  ending  of  Cato's 
speeches  in  the  Roman  Senate  than  was  a  denuncia 
tion  of  slavery  of  every  public  utterance  of  the  sena 
tor  from  Massachusetts.  It  was  with  this  message 
that  his  Lyceum  lectures  and  even  his  obituary  trib 
utes  were  weighted.  But  only  a  faulty  artistic 
sense  could  have  allowed  such  lapses  as  the  injec 
tion  of  a  long  section  from  a  ten-year-old  lecture  on 
"  White  Slavery  in  the  Barbary  States"  into  a 
Senate  speech,  or  the  devotion  of  a  fourth  of  his 
Faneuil  Hall  eulogy  of  Lincoln  to  such  irrelevant 
and  controversial  topics  as  an  elaborate  criticism  of 
the  Queen's  proclamation  regarding  belligerency, 
and  a  detailed  argument  in  favor  of  negro  suffrage. 


BUHNER'S  PERSONALITY  391 

In  his  later  years,  Suinuer  cauie  to  value  most  the 
printed  page  as  the  means  of  spreading  his  in 
fluence.  Whether  in  the  Seuate  or  upon  the  plat 
form,  therefore,  he  became  comparatively  indifferent 
to  his  immediate  hearers,  for  his  thought  was  fixed 
upon  the  vast  audience  whom  he  could  thus  reach, 
and  it  was  often  through  pressure  from  this  outside 
audience  that  his  colleagues  were  reluctantly  brought 
to  adopt  his  policies.  It  became  one  of  his  chief 
objects  of  solicitude  to  bring  out  a  revised  edition 
of  his  Works  before  his  death.  "  These  speeches," 
he  said,  "are  my  life.  As  a  connected  series  they 
will  illustrate  the  progress  of  the  great  battle  with 
slavery,  and  what  I  have  done  in  it."  At  the  task 
of  their  revision  and  annotation  he  toiled  year  after 
year.  To  cite  a  single  typical  illustration  of  the 
elaborateness  of  this  work,  he  devoted  forty -eight 
pages  of  fine  print  to  setting  forth  the  comments  in 
the  press  and  from  friends  on  his  speech,  "  The  Bar 
barism  of  Slavery."  At  the  time  of  his  death  he 
was  engaged  upon  the  tenth  volume ;  two  more  vol 
umes  were  brought  out  under  Longfellow's  supervi 
sion,  and  three  others  were  edited  by  his  literary 
executors. 

It  must  be  confessed  that  Sumner's  rhetoric  has 
not  stood  the  test  of  time.  The  very  pains  which 
he  bestowed  in  elaboration  served  in  a  measure  to 
defeat  his  object.  But  to  acknowledge  that  Sum- 
ner's  speeches  do  not  hold  the  place  which  he  hoped 
for  them  in  world  literature  is  not  to  deny  that  in 
their  day  and  generation  they  were  a  tremendous 


392  CHARLES  SUMNEK 

power  for  good.  Upon  the  lecture  platform  his  ideal 
ism  and  eloquence  captivated  aspiring  young  men, 
and  proved  one  of  the  most  effective  influences  upon 
those  who  came  to  voting  age  in  the  decade  before 
the  Civil  War.  What  gave  Sumner' s  words  their 
tremendous  power  was  their  "  fervency  of  holy  en 
thusiastic  conviction."  Profound  seriousness  per 
vaded  his  speeches,  as  it  did  Gladstone's ;  each 
made  upon  his  hearers  the  impression  "  that  the 
matter  he  was  discussing  was  that  upon  which  the 
foundations  of  heaven  and  earth  rest."  ]  He  came 
to  the  Senate  at  a  time  when  nearly  every  Northern 
leader  with  any  considerable  following  was  urging 
supine  acquiescence  in  compromise.  On  the  day 
when  his  clarion  voice  rang  out  in  stern  arraignment 
of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  men  thanked  God  that  at 
last  a  man  was  come  whose  courage  matched  his 
conscience.  By  that  speech  Sumner  ushered  in  a 
new  day. 

For  years  Sumner  was  one  of  the  most  unpopular 
men  in  the  Senate.  This  was  not  due  merely  to  the 
fact  that  the  measures  which  he  had  most  at  heart 
found  little  favor  with  the  majority  of  his  col 
leagues.  Without  any  experience  in  the  making  or 
administering  of  laws,  Sumner  had  stepped  from 
the  Lyceum  platform  into  the  most  powerful  of 
legislative  bodies.  He  changed  his  forum,  but  not 
his  manner.  He  had  become  so  accustomed  to 
swaying  vast  popular  audiences  that  he  expected 
his  hearers  to  "  accept  with  meekness  the  ingrafted 

1  G.  F.  Hoar,  Autobiography,  Vol.  II,  p.  347. 


SUMNER' S  PERSONALITY  393 

word"  ;  but  this  his  colleagues  were  by  no  means 
minded  to  do.  One  of  his  private  secretaries 
clearly  marks  this  trait : — "  Mr.  Sumuer  was  a  man 
not  ready  to  yield  to  his  equals.  *  Domineering ' 
is  a  strong  word  j  but  he  felt  a  superiority  which 
really  existed,  and  his  manner  asserted  it.  To  his 
subordinates  no  one  could  be  more  considerate, 
more  generous."  l  He  was  the  champion  of  the 
freedmen  and  insisted  that  they  must  be  accorded 
absolute  civil  equality.  Among  his  own  intimates 
he  numbered  mulatto  caterers  in  Boston  and  in 
Washington,  and  these  as  well  as  many  other  peo 
ple  of  most  humble  origin  and  opportunities  were 
welcome  in  his  parlor,  and  at  his  table, — a  wel 
come  which  it  is  said  Mrs.  Sumner  found  it  very 
hard  to  extend. 

Yet  Sumner  would  march  roughshod  over  the 
feelings  of  others  when  they  seemed  to  him  to  show 
a  "  caste"  spirit.  At  times  his  manner  was  most 
unfortunate  :  he  would  speak  with  brutal  frankness, 
far  beyond  what  the  occasion  warranted,  so  that 
men  who  admired  his  character  and  ability  and  who 
prized  his  friendship,  nevertheless  hesitated  to  urge 
his  election  to  certain  associations  of  conservative 
and  scholarly  gentlemen,  fearing  that  he  would  not 
"  fit. "  Among  his  own  colleagues,  Sumner  was  crit 
icized  for  his  aristocratic  manners,  his  airs  of  su 
periority.  He  was  reproved  by  Fessenden  for  "  lec 
turing  the  Senate."  He  nagged  his  associates  with 
reminders  of  how  they  had  at  first  derided  and 

1  F.  V.  Balch,  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  343. 


394  CHAELES  SUMNER 

/then  supported  his  measures.  He  laid  down  Lin 
coln's  duty  in  a  way  a  man  of  less  magnanimity 
would  have  resented.  Of  all  his  associates  of 
nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century  there  were  hardly  any 
but  Chase,  Schurz  and  Wilson,  with  whom  his 
personal  relations  were  not  at  some  time  severely 
strained.  In  every  great  measure  to  which  he  de 
voted  himself,  he  believed  he  saw  clearly  some  high 
moral  issue.  Says  Curtis  :  "I  was  one  day  talking 
with  him  upon  some  public  question,  and  as  our 
conversation  warmed,  I  said  to  him,  'Yes,  but  you 
forget  the  other  side.'  He  brought  his  clinched  fist 
down  upon  the  table  till  it  rang  again,  and  his  voice 
shook  the  room  as  he  thundered  in  reply,  '  There  is 
no  other  side  ! '  "  ]  Such  intolerance  of  others' 
opinions  and  motives  is  hard  to  live  with.  Never 
theless,  there  grew  up  among  his  colleagues  a  gen 
uine  respect  and  admiration  for  his  absolute  sincer 
ity,  and  in  his  later  years  the  feeling  toward  him 
became  more  kindly  than  at  the  first. 

Sumner  used  always  to  assert  the  precedence  of 
the  Senate  even  over  the  Supreme  Court  and  cab 
inet,  saying,  "  We  make  justices  and  cabinet  min 
isters."  He  sought  to  uphold  the  best  traditions  of 
the  Senate,  taking  his  official  duties  seriously,  even 
in  such  matters  as  punctuality  and  regularity  of 
attendance.  "A  senator  cannot  leave  his  place 
more  than  a  soldier,"  was  his  reply  to  a  flattering 
invitation  which  would  have  taken  him  away  from 
a  session  to  address  a  New  York  assemblage.  On 

1  Orations,  Vol.  I,  p.  25G. 


SUMMER'S  PERSONALITY  395 

the  day  following  the  Brooks  assault  his  seat  was 
vacant  for  the  first  time ;  till  the  summons  to  his 
mother's  death-bed,  a  dozen  years  later,  he  had 
never  been  absent  from  a  Senate  session  except  be 
cause  of  illness.  He  repeatedly  insisted  that  Con 
gress  had  no  right  to  adjourn,  however  great  the 
discomfort  of  life  in  Washington,  until  the  needed 
work  of  legislation  was  completed.  For  himself,  he 
cleared  his  desk  each  day  of  the  mass  of  detail,  and 
it  was  his  custom  to  remain  in  the  capital  at  the  end 
of  sessions,  until  everything  needing  his  attention 
was  disposed  of.  In  committee  service  it  was  the 
testimony  of  his  colleagues  that  he  was  efficient  and 
energetic  in  carrying  forward  the  work,  yet  consid 
erate  in  his  treatment  of  the  minority. 

Few  men  in  public  life  have  been  so  generous  in 
allowing  the  calls  and  requests  of  strangers  as  well 
as  of  constituents  to  trespass  upon  their  time  and 
strength.  But  he  would  waste  not  a  moment 
upon  such  applicants,  when  he  was  deep  in  the 
preparation  of  a  speech  or  engaged  upon  some 
other  task  of  his  office.  At  such  times,  "  How  are 
you?  Sit  down,"  would  be  the  brusque  greeting 
from  the  desk,  at  which,  with  hardly  a  glance,  the 
writer  would  continue  his  work.  Often  the  em 
barrassed  visitor,  finding  that  his  presence  was 
forgotten,  would  rise,  saying,  "I  see  you  are  busy  ; 
Fll  call  again,"  only  to  receive  the  reply,  "But 
Fm  always  busy;  what  is  your  point?"  and  the 
caller  who  had  hoped  for  an  hour's  discussion 
would  go  away  feeling  that  five  minutes  had  been 


396  CHABLES  SUMNER 

grudgingly  given.  To  reporters  and  others  who 
sought  information  from  him,  Sunmer  was  frank 
and  communicative  as  far  as  he  thought  best.  If 
the  caller  persisted  in  pushing  his  questions  beyond 
that  point,  the  answer  would  be,  "I  can't  speak  of 
that;"  further  importunity  would  be  met  by  a 
stony  stare.  Like  other  public  men,  Sumner  was 
often  approached  by  persons  who  sought  to  take 
advantage  of  their  friendship  or  acquaintance  with 
him  to  advance  some  private  interest ;  frequently 
a  corporation,  seeking  legislative  favors,  would 
persuade  men  of  his  acquaintance  to  call  upon  him. 
Sumner  resented  such  "  relaying,"  and  whenever 
he  suspected,  justly  or  unjustly,  that  this  was  being 
attempted,  he  would  become  brusque  and  re 
pellent.  It  sometimes  seemed  that  the  higher  the 
rank  or  the  closer  the  acquaintance  of  the  caller, 
the  more  unpleasant  grew  his  manner.  This  ready 
suspicion,  brusqueness  and  irritability  were  doubt 
less  due  in  large  measure  to  Sumner' s  physical  disa 
bilities,  particularly  to  the  pain  to  which  he  was 
constantly  subject  in  his  later  years  and  to  his  lack 
of  restful  sleep.  Indeed,  in  the  last  two  years  of 
his  life,  he  hardly  ever  slept  without  recourse  to 
morphia. 

He  was  jealous  for  the  good  name  of  the  Senate 
as  to  language  and  manners,  and  the  dread  of  un 
popularity  did  not  deter  him  from  demanding  a 
like  observance  of  senatorial  dignity  from  others. 
After  much  provocation,  he  denounced  Douglas's 
indulgence  in  coarse  personalities,  rebuked  the 


SUMNER'S  PERSONALITY  397 

u  plantation  manners"  of  Mason  and  Butler,  pro 
tested  against  Abbott's  threat  of  a  duel,  and  even 
moved  the  expulsion  of  a  Delaware  senator  who  had 
repeatedly  come  to  the  Senate  in  a  state  of  intoxica 
tion.  Such  school-mastering  of  one's  associates  is 
usually  pleasurable  neither  to  the  critic  nor  to  the 
one  criticized,  yet  it  was  doubtless  salutary  for  the 
Senate. 

No  American  of  Sumner's  day  had  a  wider  or  more 
distinguished  circle  of  personal  friends.  It  is  true 
that  between  him  and  his  political  associates  at  some 
stage  differences  almost  always  arose,  and  political 
differences  also  caused  sad  ruptures  in  his  relations 
with  friends  whom  he  loved  like  brothers,  as  in  the 
case  of  Hillard,  of  Howe,  of  Dana,  and  of  Lieber. 
In  most  of  these  divisive  issues  of  morals  and  poli 
tics,  it  would  seem  as  if  Sumner  were  in  the  right, 
yet  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  his  over-pertinacious 
insistence  upon  his  own  point  of  view  as  the  only 
one  possible  for  a  right-minded  man,  put  a  severe 
strain  upon  friendship.  Until  he  entered  the  Sen 
ate,  Sumner's  associations  were  decidedly  academic, 
and  he  had  been  brought  into  deep  and  abiding 
fellowship  with  the  leaders  of  American  thought 
and  literature.  Fortunate,  indeed,  was  the  young 
man  who  could  grow  up  into  intimate  relations  with 
Story  and  Greenleaf,  Quincy  and  Charming.  Among 
the  friends  of  his  prime  were  Longfellow,  Whittier, 
Holmes,  Emerson,  Hawthorne,  Lincoln,  Bancroft, 
Prescott,  and  a  score  of  those  whom  America  de 
lights  to  honor.  It  is  no  exaggeration  to  say  that 


398  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

no  other  American  of  his  time  had  so  wide  and 
eminent  an  acquaintance  abroad,  and  this  intimacy 
with  leaders  of  public  opinion  in  England,  France 
and  Germany  not  only  broadened  his  own  vision 
but  became  a  national  asset,  for  during  the  Civil 
War  the  administration  was  kept  in  touch  with 
shiftings  of  public  sentiment  in  England  hardly 
more  through  the  channels  of  the  State  Department 
than  through  Suinner's  correspondence. 

In  his  unrelenting  warfare  against  slavery  and 
other  forms  of  social  injustice  Sumner  found  his 
stanchest  supporters  among  the  preachers  and 
members  of  Christian  churches  of  every  denomina 
tion,  yet  he  himself  paid  little  heed  to  formal  re 
ligious  ordinances.  At  the  age  of  twenty-two,  he 
replied  to  a  college  friend,  who  had  written  to  him 
in  grave  anxiety  for  his  spiritual  welfare,  in  a  letter 
of  singular  candor  :  ".  .  .  I  do  not  think  that 
I  have  a  basis  for  faith  to  build  upon.  I  am  with 
out  religious  feeling.  ...  I  believe,  though, 
that  my  love  to  my  neighbor  ...  is  pure  and 
strong.  Certainly  I  do  feel  an  affection  for  every 
thing  that  God  created ;  and  this  feeling  is  my  re 
ligion."  And  he  quoted  Coleridge's  lines  begin 
ning, 

"  He  prayeth  well,  who  loveth  well 
Both  man  and  bird  and  beast," 

as  illustrating  his  feeling. 

In  his  more  mature  years  it  was  doubtless  Chan- 
ning's  influence  that  was  strongest  in  moulding  his 
thought  on  matters  of  ethics  and  religion.  It  meant 


SUMNER' S  PERSONALITY  399 

much  for  Simmer  that  for  nearly  ten  years  he  was 
brought  close  to  this  great  leader  of  men  on  terms 
of  intimate  and  almost  idolizing  friendship.  But 
in  King's  Chapel  (Unitarian)  where  for  a  time  he 
used  to  occupy  his  father's  place  at  the  head  of  the 
family  pew,  and  in  most  other  Boston  churches 
Sumner  found  that  the  Christianity  that  was  being 
preached  concerned  itself  little  with  the  slave  or 
with  the  humanitarian  causes  to  which  his  life  was 
devoted.  To  do  a  man's  part  in  bringing  in  the 
new  day  was  Sumner' s  task  ;  he  tortured  himself 
with  no  anxieties  about  saving  his  own  soul.  "  I 
never  knew  a  man,"  declared  one  of  his  private 
secretaries,  "with  a  firmer  grasp  upon  the  faith 
in  the  good  God.  He  once  said  to  a  friend  in  my 
presence  that  he  would  not  turn  over  his  hand  to 
know  whether  he  should  consciously  live  again  or 
not,  so  sure  was  he  that  all  was  for  the  best."  l  And 
this  same  high  optimism  was  the  source  of  his  faith 
in  the  dark  days  before  and  during  the  war.  In  a 
universe  ruled  as  he  believed  by  moral  law,  it  was 
inconceivable  to  him  that  Slavery  could  triumph  in 
the  contest  with  Freedom. 

Sumner' s  friendship  was  pervaded  by  a  warmth 
of  sympathy  rarely  to  be  found  in  a  man.  ' (  Heaven 
lend  me  in  perpetuity,"  wrote  Greenleaf,  "  your 
ever-gushing  fountain  of  self-denying  kindness  to 
friends  ! ' '  He  seems  never  to  have  been  happier 

1  F.  V.  Balch,  quoted  by  Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  344. 

2  In  Washington,  during  the  strenuous  days  of  the  war,  he 
gave  of  his  time  and  strength  without  stint  in  aiding  those  who 
were  trying  to  get  to  some  wounded  soldier  or  to  recover  the 


400  CHAELES  SUMMER 

than  when  helping  a  man  of  aspiration  and  promise 
to  secure  a  firmer  foothold  on  the  ladder.  He  would 
leave  his  desk  to  go  out  on  'change  and  raise  among 
his  friends  the  funds  to  send  an  ambitious  boy 
to  college.  His  ardent  and  tireless  efforts  to  gain 
recognition  for  Crawford,  his  eager  commendations 
of  the  works  of  Lieber  and  Longfellow,  of  Prescott 
and  Motley,  to  European  critics  are  typical  of  his 
abounding  helpfulness.  It  may  be  that  we  have 
Sumner  to  thank  for  The  Scarlet  Letter.  While 
George  Bancroft  was  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  under 
date  of  January  9,  1846,  Sumuer  sent  the  following 
letter  to  Mrs.  Bancroft : 


"  You  will  think  that  I  never  appear,  except  as  a 
beggar.  Very  well.  I  never  beg  for  myself.  But  I 
do  beg  now  most  earnestly  for  another  ;  for  a  friend 
of  mine  and  of  your  husband's  ;  for  a  man  of  letters, 
of  gentleness. 

"I  have  heard  to-day  of  the  poverty  of  Haw 
thorne.  He  is  very  poor  indeed.  He  has  already 
broken  up  the  humble  and  inexpensive  home  which 
he  had  established  in  Concord,  because  it  was  too 
expensive.  You  know  how  simply  he  lived.  He 
lived  almost  on  nothing  ;  but  even  that  nothing  has 
gone.  Let  me  say  to  your  husband  (for  I  would 
not  quote  Latin  to  a  lady) 

bodies  of  their  dead.  Colonel  Higginson  says  Of  him  :  "  I  have 
never  known  in  public  life  so  prompt  arid  faithful  a  correspond 
ent,  or  one  so  ready  to  espouse  the  cause  of  some  individual, 
man  or  woman,  who  needed  aid.  He  had  no  band  of  hench 
men,  no  one  who  had  been  won  to  support  him  for  value  re 
ceived  ;  but  the  blessings  of  the  poor,  the  friendless,  the  power 
less  were  his." — Contemporaries,  p.  290. 


BUHNER'S  PERSONALITY  401 

"  '  Nil  habuit  Codrus.     Quia  euim  uegat?     Et  tamen  illud 
Perdidit  infelix  totum  nibil.' 

"Some  of  bis  savings  were  lent  to  Mr.  Kipley  at 
Brook  Farm  ;  but  he  is  not  able  to  repay  1  hem,  and 
poor  Hawthorne  (that  most  gentle  true  nature)  has 
not  wherewithal  to  live.  I  need  not  speak  of  his 
genius  to  you.  He  is  an  ornament  of  the  country  ; 
nor  is  there  a  person  of  any  party  who  would  not 
hear  with  delight  that  the  author  of  such  Gold- 
sinithian  prose,  as  he  writes,  has  received  honor  and 
office  from  his  country. 

"I  plead  for  him  earnestly,  and  count  upon  your 
friendly  interference  to  keep  his  name  present  to  the 
mind  of  your  husband,  so  that  it  may  not  be  pushed 
out  of  sight  by  the  intrusive  legion  of  clamorous 
office-seekers  or  by  other  public  cares. 

"Some  post-office,  some  custom-house,  something 
that  will  yield  daily  bread, — anything  in  the  gift  of 
your  husband, — or  that  his  potent  influence  might 
command — will  confer  great  happiness  upon  Haw 
thorne,  and,  I  believe,  dear  Mrs.  Bancroft,  it  will 
confer  greater  happiness  on  you. 

"I  wish  I  could  have  some  assurance  from  your 
husband  that  Hawthorne  should  be  cared  for.  .  .  . 

' 1 1  wrote  your  husband  lately  on  peace  ;  but  he 
will  not  heed  my  words. 

"Believe  me,  dear  Mrs.  Bancroft, 

"Yours  sincerely  (provided  you  do  not  forget 
Hawthorne) 

"CHARLES  SUMNER." 


Bancroft  replied,  under  date  of  January  13,  1846. 

"  As  to  Hawthorne,  I  have  been  most  per- 

severingly  his  friend.     I  am  glad  you  go  for  the 

good  rule  of  dismissing  wicked  Whigs  and  putting 


402  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

in  Democrats.  Set  ine  down  as  without  influence, 
if  so  soon  as  the  course  of  business  will  properly 
permit,  you  do  not  find  Hawthorne  an  office-holder." 

Six  weeks  later  Bancroft  wrote  to  President  Polk, 
endorsing  the  appointment  of  Hawthorne  as  Sur 
veyor  at  the  Salem  Custom  House.1 

Brief  mention  must  be  made  of  Sumner's  marriage. 
In  early  life  he  is  said  to  have  met  with  a  crushing 
disappointment.  In  later  years  his  conversation 
and  letters  gave  frank  expression  to  his  loneliness 
and  his  envy  of  the  domestic  joys  of  his  friends,  but 
until  he  had  become  middle-aged  and  famous  he 
seemed  to  have  renounced  all  thought  of  such  hap 
piness  for  himself.  In  the  weeks  following  his 
mother's  death,  he  confided  to  a  friend  that  now  for 
the  first  time  in  his  life  he  might  feel  at  liberty  to 
marry,  adding  the  somewhat  cool-blooded  explana 
tion  that  he  had  never  before  had  the  means  to  sup 
port  a  family.  For  several  years  it  had  been  his 
habit  to  dine  as  often  as  once  a  week  at  the  home 
of  Congressman  Hooper,  and  it  was  no  surprise  to 
intimate  friends  when  Sumuer  announced  his  en 
gagement  to  Mr.  Hooper's  daughter-in-law,  a  hand 
some  and  ambitious  young  widow  of  twenty-eight, 
with  one  daughter  eight  years  of  age.  He  entered 
upon  his  new  experience  with  high  hopes  and  with 
the  felicitations  of  a  host  of  friends,— none  more 
sympathetic  and  cordial  than  an  exquisite  letter 
from  George  Bancroft.2  To  Whittier,  Sumner 

1  Howe,  Life  and  Letters  of  George  Bancroft,  Vol.  I,  pp.  264- 
267.  2 Pierce,  Vol.  IV,  p.  303. 


SUMMER'S  PERSONALITY  403 

wrote  :  "  To-day  [October  17,  1866]  at  three  o'clock, 
I  shall  be  married,  and  at  the  age  of  fifty-five  begin 
to  live."  But  his  hopes  were  doomed  to  speedy 
disappointment.  October  and  May  did  not  prove 
congenial,  and  before  the  first  anniversary  of  their 
marriage,  they  had  separated  forever.  A  few  years 
later  Sunmer  secured  an  uncoutested  divorce. 
Throughout  this  bitter  experience  he  retained  the 
affectionate  regard  of  his  friends.  Mr.  Hooper, 
whose  sympathies  would  naturally  be  with  his 
daughter-in-law,  relying,  as  he  said,  u  upon  Suni 
ner' s  manly  strength  and  magnanimity,"  tried  to 
bring  about  a  reconciliation,  but  his  failure  to  do 
so  did  not  cloud  his  friendship  and  admiration  for 
Sumner,  with  whom  he  remained  on  terms  of  the 
closest  intimacy  till  death. 

In  the  first  fourteen  years  of  Suniner' s  life  in 
Washington,  he  occupied  modest  and  inexpensive 
lodgings.  But  in  1867  he  bought  a  house,  overlook 
ing  Lafayette  Square,  standing  upon  a  part  of  the 
site  now  occupied  by  the  Arlington  Hotel.  This 
was  to  be  his  home  for  the  remaining  years  of  his 
life,  and  into  his  arrangements  and  furnishings  he 
wrought  his  own  individuality,  so  that  it  became 
one  of  the  notable  houses  in  Washington.  He  gave 
much  thought  to  the  disposal  of  his  treasures,  the 
fruits  of  years  of  foreign  travel,  grouping  them  ac 
cording  to  some  principles  of  association,  which  he 
delighted  to  expound  to  his  friends.  "  So  numer 
ous  were  the  paintings  that  not  only  every  inch  of 
wall  space  in  the  halls  as  well  as  in  the  principal 


404  CHARLES  SUMNER 

rooms  was  covered,  but  many  pictures  hung  on  the 
doors,  stood  iii  the  corners,  acted  as  screens  for  fire 
places,  or  stood  on  movable  easels."  For  years 
Suniner  had  been  an  enthusiastic  collector  of  en 
gravings,  of  which  he  was  a  better  judge  than  of 
paintings.  The  best  of  these,  to  the  number  of 
nearly  one  hundred  and  fifty,  framed  in  accordance 
with  his  own  notions,  hung  upon  his  walls,  where 
they  were  later  appraised  at  over  $10,000.  Though 
an  omnivorous  reader,  Sumner  always  placed  large 
dependence  on  public  libraries,  so  that  in  his  own 
library  most  of  the  books  were  "  tools,  rarities  or 
authors'  presentation  copies."  Among  the  rarities 
were  the  Bible  which  solaced  Buuyan  in  Bedford 
Gaol,  Erasmus's  "St.  Luke,"  with  original  pen- 
and-ink  designs  by  Holbein  on  the  margins,  Mil 
ton's  "Pindar,"  and  a  host  of  others,  which  now, 
with  Simmer's  splendid  collection  of  autographs,  fill 
several  cases  in  the  treasure- room  of  the  Harvard 
University  Library.  Among  his  autographs,  the 
one  Sunmer  prized  most  was  in  an  album,  "  kept  at 
Geneva,  1608-1640,  in  which  Milton  had  recorded 
his  name,  an  extract  from  Comus,  and  a  line  from 
Horace."  In  the  later  years  of  his  life,  he  "gath 
ered  new  works  about  him  until  every  table,  chair 
and  lounge  was  groaning  under  their  load,  and 
heaps  so  encumbered  the  floor  that  navigation 
among  the  piles  was  difficult  if  not  dangerous." 

To  this  scholar's  retreat  a  warm  welcome  was  al 
ways  extended  to  congenial  friends.  Phillips  and 
Howe,  Palfrey  and  E.  L.  Pierce,  and  other  New  Eng- 


SUMNEK'S  PEESONALITY  405 

landers  were  his  guests  when  in  Washington.  Caleb 
Gushing  was  oftenest  at  his  table.  Dickens  dined 
here  with  Stauton ;  in  fact,  few  foreigners  of  emi 
nence  visited  Washington  without  being  dined  by 
Sumuer.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  Simmer  ever 
knew  happier  hours  than  when  he  gathered  a  few 
choice  friends  about  his  own  table,  or  sat  discours 
ing  with  them  of  the  teeming  reminiscences  sug 
gested  by  rare  books  and  engravings  which  crowded 
them  on  every  hand. 

It  was  a  marked  characteristic  of  Su inner  that  he 
"  had  no  humor  himself  and  little  sense  of  it  in 
others."  One  who  knew  him  intimately  as  a  young 
man  declared  that  though  an  interesting  talker,  "he 
had  no  lightness  of  touch,  .  .  .  was  put  off  his 
feet  by  the  least  persiflage  ;  if  it  was  tried  on  him, 
his  expression  was  one  of  complete  astonishment." 
Holmes  said  that  anything  of  the  nature  of  a  jest 
came  very  hard  to  Sumner,  who  would  look  be 
wildered  and  almost  distressed  with  pleasantry  that 
set  a  company  laughing.  He  quoted  a  common 
friend  as  saying  that  "if  one  told  Charles  Sumuer 
that  the  moon  was  made  of  green  cheese,  he  would 
controvert  the  alleged  fact  in  all  sincerity,  and  give 
good  reasons  why  it  could  not  be  so."  Schurz  de 
clared  that  Simmer  ' l  almost  always  failed  to  see  the  \ 
point  of  the  quaint  anecdotes  or  illustrations  with 
which  Lincoln  was  fond  of  elucidating  his  argument, 
as  with  a  flashlight.  Sumner  not  seldom  quoted  such 
Lincoluisms  to  me,  and  asked  me  with  an  air  of 
innocent  bewilderment,  whether  I  could  guess  what 


406  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

the  President  could  possibly  have  meant."  J  It  was 
this  lack  of  humor  which  made  him  always  take 
himself  with  such  portentous  seriousness,  and  pre 
vented  his  relaxing  to  meet  his  fellows  on  their 
common  plane.  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe  once  in 
vited  him  to  meet  Edwin  Booth  at  her  house.  He 
replied,  "  I  do  not  know  that  I  wish  to  meet  your 
friend.  I  have  outlived  my  interest  in  indi  viduals. ' ' 
In  her  diary  Mrs.  Howe  recorded  this  somewhat 
ungracious  utterance  with  the  comment :  "  God 
Almighty,  by  the  last  accounts,  has  not  got  so  far 
as  this!"2  A  nagging  colleague  once  attributed 
Sumner' s  persistent  criticism  of  the  administration 
to  dyspepsia,  whereupon  Sumner  assured  the  Senate 
that  he  had  never  suffered  from  dyspepsia  in  his 
life.  When  questioned  as  to  the  alleged  venality  of 
the  Senate,  he  gave  as  his  ground  for  believing  that 
the  stories  were  exaggerated  :  u  I  am  quite  sure  that 
no  one  ever  approached  me  with  an  underhand  pro 
posal."  The  story  is  told  that  "  one  afternoon  when 
he  was  leaving  Dr.  Howe's  garden  at  South  Boston, 
the  doctor's  youngest  daughter  ran  out  from  the 
house  and  called  to  him :  i i  Good-bye,  Mr.  Sumner ! ' ' 
His  back  was  already  turned,  but  he  faced  about 
like  an  officer  on  parade,  and  said  with  formal 
gravity  :  "  Good-evening,  child  !  "  so  that  the  little 
girl's  sprightly  mother  could  not  help  laughing  at 
him.  It  is  a  great  pity  that  Sumner  did  not  know 
the  joys  of  a  home  of  his  own  in  his  early  manhood. 

1  Reminiscences,  Vol.  II,  p.  312. 
1  Ibid.,  p.  174. 


SUMMER'S  PEESONALITY  407 

"With  the  corrective  of  wife  and  child,  his  outlook 
upon  life  might  have  become  not  only  humane  but 
simply  and  frankly  human. 

Sumner  was  not  without  certain  foibles  which 
grew  upon  him  with  age  and  attracted  the  more 
attention  because  of  his  greatness.  Thus,  he  prided 
himself  upon  his  artistic  sense  :  he  was  much  given 
to  quoting  poetry,  yet  with  no  fine  feeling  of  its  val 
ues  ;  he  collected  paintings  and  other  works  of  art, 
enjoyed  haunting  studios,  took  great  delight  in 
the  theatre  and  opera,  wrote  not  a  little  in  the  way 
of  art  criticism,  and  in  his  later  years  devoted  all 
the  time  and  more  money  than  he  could  spare  to  the 
collecting  of  old  engravings,  manuscripts  and  other 
literary  curios.  Yet  in  none  of  these  fields  of  inter 
est  did  he  show  genuine  artistic  discrimination.  His 
most  intimate  friend  among  artists,  William  Wet- 
more  Story,  said  of  him  :  "  The  world  of  art,  as  art 
purely,  was  to  him  always  a  half- opened,  if  not  a 
locked  world.  He  longed  to  enter  into  it,  and  feel 
as  an  artist  does  ;  but  the  keys  were  never  given  to 
him."  His  taste  in  sculpture  may  be  indicated  by 
his  congratulations  to  Greenough  (to  whom  he  once 
referred  as  "I  doubt  not  the  most  accomplished 
artist  alive")  upon  the  completion  of  his  " Wash 
ington"  as  "sure  to  give  you  fame,"  though  he 
warns  him  that  he  must  not  be  annoyed  by  the 
''criticisms  of  people  knowing  nothing  about  art."  ] 

'For  sixty  years  this  sculptural  abortion — "The  Father  of 
his  Country,"  nude  to  the  waist,  with  a  blanket  over  his  knees, 
seated  in  an  ornate  Roman  chair,  his  hand  upraised  as  if  sig- 


408  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Sumuer  bequeathed  his  collection  of  nearly  a  hun 
dred  paintings  to  the  Boston  Art  Museum,  author 
izing  its  trustees  to  sell  what  they  did  not  care  to 
keep.  More  than  two-thirds  were  forthwith  sold ; 
of  the  pictures  retained,  only  two  are  occasionally 
shown  in  the  galleries. 

A  foible  which  subjected  Sumner  to  some  criticism 
and  which  became  more  prominent  in  his  later  years, 
was  a  craving  for  approval,  seemingly  as  inconsist 
ent  with  his  breadth  of  mind  as  with  his  independ 
ence  in  action.  He  showed  little  of  this  in  his  col 
lege  days,  and  intimate  letters  indicate  that  he  re 
turned  from  his  tour  of  Europe  singularly  unspoiled 
by  the  unprecedented  attentions  showered  upon 
him  which  could  hardly  fail  to  turn  the  head  of 
so  young  a  man.  But  the  lionizing  which  awaited 
him,  and  the  sudden  fame  which  followed  his  first 
oratorical  triumphs  heightened  his  appreciation  of 
himself  and  of  his  powers.  Night  after  night,  the 
facing  of  great  audiences  under  the  spell  of  his  mag 
nificent  presence  and  splendid  eloquence  almost  in 
evitably  made  the  speaker  more  statuesque.  It  was 


naling  a  passing  car — sat  facing  the  Capitol.     At  last  it  has 
been  suppressed. 

Suraner,  however,  rendered  a  genuine  service  to  art  by 
a  speech  in  the  Senate  showing  the  absurdity  of  making  a  con 
tract  for  a  statue  of  Abraham  Lincoln,  to  be  executed  by  Vinnie 
Ream,  an  aspiring  young  woman  from  the  West,  who  had  never 
attempted  anything  more  ambitious  than  a  portrait  bust.  He 
insisted  that  national  dignity  demanded  the  very  best  examples 
of  American  sculpture  for  its  capital,  and  he  referred  to  several 
sculptural  groups  of  a  much  lower  grade, — nuisances  which 
have  not  yet  been  abated.  Speech  in  Senate,  July  17,  1866. 


SUMNER'S  PERSONALITY  409 

noted  that  as  he  crossed  the  Public  Garden  in  Bos 
ton,  he  had  a  habit  of  pausing  to  gaze  upon  the 
bronze  of  Story,  and  the  irreverent  concluded  that 
he  was  wondering  how  he  himself  would  look  upon 
a  pedestal, — as  he  now  stands  over  against  his  some 
time  teacher.  He  used  to  ask  his  friends  if  they 
could  see  his  resemblance  to  Edmund  Burke ;  and 
three  pictures  of  Burke  were  to  be  found  in  his 
study.  As  he  strode  the  street  or  mounted  the 
platform,  people  thought  he  was  not  unpleasantly 
conscious  of  the  impression  he  was  making.  In  the 
Senate  he  knew,  as  every  one  else  knew,  that  for 
years  he  had  no  peer  in  learning,  in  eloquence  and, 
by  a  strange  combination  of  causes,  in  influence. 
He  was  at  all  times  a  bit  forensic  ;  he  never  quite 
shook  off  the  senator's  toga.  With  his  growing 
fame  and  power,  in  his  last  years  the  savor  of  in 
cense  became  more  sweet  to  his  nostrils,  and  he  un 
consciously  exacted  not  only  agreement  but  defer 
ence  from  those  who  would  be  his  friends.  The 
opening  of  his  morning's  mail  was  quite  a  function, 
at  which  he  was  obviously  gratified  to  have  his 
guests  present,  as  he  read  selections  from  the  letters 
of  this  and  that  distinguished  correspondent.  In 
social  gatherings  he  expected  to  lead  the  conversa 
tion,  to  dominate  the  dinner-table.  The  caustic 
editor  of  The  Nation  wrote  to  a  friend  of  "  a  dinner 
at  the  l  Radical  Club,'  with  Sumuer  opposite  me 
smiling  like  a  benign  god  on  his  disciples  and  dis 
pensing  wisdom  piecemeal ;  "  and  added  other  words 
which  showed  Suinner's  weaknesses  not  more  clearly 


410  CHARLES  SUMNER 

than  some  of  the  temperamental  limitations  of  his 
gifted  critic. 

But  if  this  love  of  deference  and  approval  seem  a 
surprising  weakness  in  so  great  a  man,  two  things 
are  to  be  remembered.  To  Sumner  praise  was  a 
thing  which  it  was  ever  more  blessed  to  give  than 
to  receive.  Whenever  a  friend  achieved  some  suc 
cess  or  produced  a  good  piece  of  work,  no  one  was 
more  prompt  in  generous  congratulation  and  en 
couragement  ;  and  he  who  found  such  joy  in  lavish 
ing  praise  where  it  was  merited,  felt  chilled  if 
others  withheld  approval  when  he  deserved  well. 
What  seemed  to  some  an  inordinate  love  of  commen 
dation  was  rather,  as  Senator  Hoar  says,  a  love  of 
sympathy.  Moreover,  keenly  as  he  appreciated 
praise,  he  never  aped  the  courtier  or  shifty  politi 
cian  to  cater  for  it.  Grateful,  indeed,  was  the  ap 
proval  of  friends  and  of  the  public,  when  it  came  ; 
but  his  eyes  were  fixed  on  the  stars,  and  through 
good  and  evil  report  he  swerved  his  course  neither 
to  the  right  hand  nor  to  the  left  to  catch  popular 
favor.  Indeed,  Sumuer's  faults  and  foibles  were 
but  the  defects  of  his  qualities.  If  he  was  at  times 
unpractical,  it  was  through  loyalty  to  a  high  ideal. 
If  he  was  over-persistent  in  urging  his  favorite 
measures,  it  was  from  an  excess  of  zeal  for  right  as 
he  saw  it.  If  he  showed  little  willingness  to  yield 
even  on  minor  points  in  order  to  secure  common 
action,  it  was  but  an  evidence  of  that  uncompromi 
sing  tenacity  of  purpose  so  rare  among  public  men 
at  the  time  when  he  entered  the  Senate. 


SUMNER'S  PERSONALITY  411 

These  characteristics  made  Sumner  hard  to  get  on 
with,  but  they  left  no  cloud  upon  his  fame.  Far 
outweighing  them  were  qualities  which  won  respect 
and  admiration  even  from  bitter  opponents.  Known 
of  all  men  were  the  stainless  purity  of  his  life,  his 
freedom  from  any  unworthy  self-seeking  or  ambi 
tion,  his  generous  sympathy  with  the  oppressed  of 
every  race  and  land,  his  magnanimity,  and  his 
dauntless  courage.  But  to  those  who  came  closest 
to  him  as  a  man,  he  revealed  qualities  which  stran 
gers  would  hardly  have  believed  he  could  possess,  —a 
character  as  simple  as  that  of  a  child,  gentleness  and 
tenderness  rarely  blended  with  such  rugged  strength, 
and  a  sympathy  so  warm,  so  deep,  as  to  make  his 
friendship  a  treasure  and  an  inspiration. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

CIVIL  RIGHTS  AND  THE  BATTLE-FLAG   RESOLU 
TION  :      CLOSING  SCENES 

To  Sumner' s  way  of  thinking,  the  war's  results 
for  the  freedmen  were  but  half  secured  when  they 
were  given  the  ballot.  He  believed  that  enlightened 
statesmanship  and  justice  required  that  the  negroes 
be  placed  upon  precisely  the  same  plane  with  the 
whites.  In  the  next  session  of  Congress,  therefore, 
Sumner  made  a  most  stubborn  fight  to  secure  the 
passage  of  his  Civil  Eights  Bill,  which  included 
sweeping  prohibitions  of  discriminations  on  account 
of  race  or  color,  in  railway  cars,  theatres,  inns, 
churches,  and  cemeteries,  and  in  jury  service. 
Every  device  of  the  expert  parliamentarian  did 
Sumner  bring  to  the  support  of  this  measure.1  He 
sought  to  attach  it  as  a  rider  to  the  Amnesty  Bill, 
declaring  that  the  act  of  justice  and  the  act  of 
generosity  should  stand  together.  By  the  casting- 
vote  of  the  Vice- President  he  succeeded,  but  the 
amendment  weighted  the  Amnesty  Bill  so  heavily 
that  it  failed  to  secure  the  requisite  two-thirds  vote. 
Months  later  the  bitter  contest  was  renewed,  and 
carried  through  substantially  the  same  stages.  At 

1  Deo.  20,  1871.  Congressional  Records,  42d  Congress,  2d  Ses 
sion,  p.  244.  H.  E.  Flack,  The  Adoption  of  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment,  p.  250. 


CLOSING  SCENES  413 

one  juncture  Sumner's  opponents  took  an  unfair 
advantage  of  him.  At  5  : 45  A.  M.,  at  the  end  of  an 
all-night  session  from  which  illness  had  compelled 
him  to  be  absent,  his  favorite  measure  was  called  up 
without  warning,  was  stripped  of  almost  all  its  force 
by  amendments,  and  then  passed.  Coming  to  the 
Senate  a  few  hours  later,  Simmer  denounced  this 
underhand  proceeding,  and  reintroduced  his  own 
measure.  The  outcome  of  mouths  of  most  persistent 
fighting  was  defeat  :  the  Amnesty  Bill  became  a 
law,  but  civil  rights  secured  no  additional  safeguards 
from  this  Congress. 

During  this  session  Sumner  was  drawn  into  a  con 
troversy  which  aroused  not  a  little  bitterness  at  the 
time,  but  which  has  now  passed  almost  entirely  out 
of  mind.  The  question  arose  over  some  suspicious 
circumstances  under  which  arms  had  been  sold  to 
France  during  the  Franco-Prussian  War.  In  a 
study  of  the  present  scope,  it  is  not  necessary  to  go 
into  the  matter  in  detail.  Sumner  and  Schurz  re 
ceived  information  which  led  them  to  believe  that 
sales  of  arms  by  the  United  States  to  agents  of 
France  had  been  made  and  continued  in  violation  of 
the  obligations  of  neutrality.  After  years  of 
strenuous  insistence  upon  these  obligations  in  the 
controversy  over  the  Alabama  claims,  Sumuer  could 
not  tolerate  the  idea  that  his  own  country  should 
show  herself  lax  in  this  regard.  He  therefore 
moved  the  appointment  of  a  committee  of  investiga 
tion.  The  proposition  was  sharply  antagonized  by 
champions  of  the  President,  and  the  debate — in 


414  CHARLES  SUMNER 

which  Schurz  took  the  leading  part  because  of  Sum- 
uer's  ill-health — led  to  much  angry  discussion. 
Sumner  and  Schurz  were  denounced  as  ' l  emissaries ' ' 
and  i  l  spies ' '  of  foreign  governments,  their  treason 
able  offense  consisting  in  their  raising  the  question 
whether  their  country  had  been  doing  its  full  duty 
as  a  neutral.  The  motion  was  finally  carried. 
Surnner  stated  that  his  health  would  not  permit  his 
serving  on  such  a  committee.  Its  members  were 
then  elected  by  the  Senate,  and,  in  disregard  of  prec 
edent  and  of  fair-dealing,  not  one  of  the  seven  was 
chosen  from  those  who  had  spoken  in  favor  of  the 
inquiry,  although  its  most  strenuous  opponents 
were  given  places.  The  voluminous  report  of  this 
committee  disclosed  no  ground  for  blame  of  the  War 
Department  or  of  other  officers  of  the  government. 
Sumner  assailed  the  report  as  i  i  wanting  in  ordinary 
fairness,  unbecoming  in  tone,  unjust  to  senators  who 
had  deemed  it  their  duty  to  move  the  inquiry,  and 
ridiculous  in  its  attempt  to  expound  international 
law. ' '  No  fair-minded  man  could  question  Summer's 
conscientiousness  in  forcing  this  investigation,  but 
many  of  his  friends  regretted  that  he  had  allowed  so 
much  of  his  waning  strength  to  be  diverted  to  a  con 
troversy,  almost  the  only  result  of  which  was  to  em 
bitter  still  further  his  relations  with  the  administra 
tion. 

But  the  subject  most  in  men's  minds  during  this 
session  was  the  approaching  presidential  election. 
Aside  from  his  antagonism  to  Grant,  Sumner  would 
have  opposed  his  reelection  on  general  principles  : 


CLOSING  SCENES  415 

he  renewed  at  this  session  a  measure  which  he  had 
advocated  in  previous  years, — a  constitutional 
amendment  making  a  President  ineligible  for  a 
second  term.  He  qualified  this,  however,  by  a 
clause  which  made  it  inapplicable  to  the  pending 
election.  A  resolution  which  he  introduced  later 
aimed  to  secure  the  election  of  President  by  popular 
vote. 

In  1872  there  were  many  who  had  been  leaders  in 
Republican  party  councils  who  now  believed  that 
the  reelection  of  Grant  would  not  be  for  the  best  in 
terests  of  the  party  or  of  the  country.  His  personal 
associations,  and  li  aide-de-camp-i&h"  tendencies 
(as  Suniuer  called  them)  ;  his  lack  of  skill  or  tact  in 
the  choice  and  retention  of  trustworthy  advisers  ; 
his  high-handed  pursuit  of  his  own  will,  as  in  the 
San  Domingo  scheme  ;  the  abuses  that  he  allowed 
to  go  unchecked — all  these  created  the  wide- spread 
feeling  which  gave  rise  to  the  Liberal  Republican 
party.  This  came  into  existence  primarily  to  pre 
vent  Grant's  reelection  ;  its  leaders  included  many 
men  of  light  and  leading,  notably  Schurz  and  Trum- 
bull,  and  a  group  of  the  most  influential  journalists, 
among  whom  were  Horace  Greeley,  Whitelaw  Reid 
and  Samuel  Bowles.  A  convention  was  called  to 
meet  in  Cincinnati,  May  1,  1872,  and  for  weeks  in 
advance  of  that  date  leaders  of  the  movement  be 
sought  Sumner  to  ally  himself  openly  with  them, 
urging  the  steadying  influence  which  his  support 
would  give  to  the  enterprise. 

But  Sumner  was  always  reluctant  to  commit  him- 


416  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

self  as  to  the  choice  of  candidates.  He  seemed  to 
regard  such  campaign  work  as  hardly  fitting  in  a 
senator,  and  for  the  personal  side  of  politics  he  had 
little  liking  or  aptitude.  He  frankly  acknowledged 
that  in  the  pending  election  his  two  desires  were 
"(1)  the  protection  of  the  colored  race,  and  (2)  the 
defeat  of  Grant."  There  were  shrewd  politicians 
who  believed  that  if  he  would  come  out  with  a  hearty 
endorsement  of  the  movement,  his  own  name  would 
be  the  probable  choice  of  the  Cincinnati  convention. 
No  other  man  personified  so  fully  the  grounds  for  op 
position  to  Grant,  and  there  is  no  question  that  Sum 
ner' s  heart  was  set  upon  reconciliation  between  the 
sections,  though  his  methods  did  not  appeal  to  men 
of  the  South.  His  failing  health  was  a  serious  ob 
jection  to  his  candidacy.  It  is  hardly  possible  that 
he  could  have  been  elected,  for  his  name  would  not 
have  been  acceptable  to  Democrats,  North  or  South.1 
Nor  would  he  have  made  a  strong  President,  partic 
ularly  at  that  juncture.  Sumner  had  had  singularly 
little  experience  in  administrative  work,  and  it  is 
hard  to  imagine  his  exhibiting  the  tact  necessary  to 
get  on  well  with  the  heads  of  departments,  or  with 


'Nevertheless  his  name  did  receive  serious  consideration  from 
some  Democrats.  In  the  Springfield  Republican  of  June  18, 
1872,  appeared  a  letter,  signed  "A  Jeffersonian  Democrat "  and 
addressed  to  members  of  the  National  Democratic  Convention, 
to  assemble  in  Baltimore  the  following  month.  Reprinted  as  a 
broadside,  this  letter  is  in  the  Sumner  Collection  in  the  Harvard 
Library.  It  is  headed:  "  For  President,  Charles  Sumner  of 
Massachusetts.  For  Vice- President,  William  S.  Groesbeck  of 
Ohio."  It  puts  Sumner  forward  as  the  candidate  who  would 
draw  the  largest  following  away  from  Graut. 


CLOSING  SCENES  417 

Congress.     His  talent  and  his  task  lay  in  quite  other 
lines. 

It  is  difficult  to  see  what  advantage  Sumner  ex 
pected  would  result  from  his  reserve.  Had  he  come 
out  into  the  open,  he  might  have  helped  steady  the 
opposition  to  Grant  and  force  at  Cincinnati  a  nomi 
nation  that  would  have  given  promise  of  success. 
Even  after  the  preposterous  choice  of  Greeley  had 
been  made,  Sunnier  still  delayed  in  declaring  his 
intentions.  He  wrote  to  a  friend  :  i  i  Nor  have  I 
ever  given  a  hint  to  a  human  being  as  to  my  future 
course.  ...  Of  this  I  shall  not  speak  until  I 
can  see  the  whole  field,  and  especially  the  bearing 
on  the  colored  race."  He  found  himself  between 
two  fires,  importuned  on  the  one  hand  to  help  lead 
the  Liberal  Republicans  to  victory,  and  on  the 
other,  in  spite  of  the  grievous  wounds  he  had  re 
ceived  at  its  hands,  not  to  desert  the  party  with 
which  from  its  beginning  he  had  fought  so  valiantly. 
Wilson,  who  had  earlier  tried  to  heal  the  breach 
between  Grant  and  Sumuer,  was  now  eager  for  the 
vice-presidency,  and  renewed  his  appeals  to  Sum 
ner' s  loyalty  to  party.  Sumner  kept  upon  terms  of 
friendship  with  Wilson,  but  from  the  press  and  from 
the  cartoonist  he  received  much  undeserved  abuse 
for  his  "  sulking  in  his  tent"  and  deserting  his  old 
party. 

Yet  his  mind  had  long  been  made  up  :  the  session 
should  not  end  without  his  setting  forth  the  reasons 
why  in  his  opinion  Grant  should  not  be  reflected. 
Under  cover  of  speaking  to  his  motion  for  the  indef- 


418  CHAELES  SUMNEK 

inite  postponement  of  the  appropriation  bill,  on  the 
last  day  of  May  —  four  days  before  the  end  of  the 
session  —  he  launched  into  a  fierce  philippic  against 
the  President.  The  Senate  chamber  and  galleries 
soon  were  thronged.  Sumner  spoke  with  intense 
feeling.  There  were  vulnerable  points  enough  in 
Grant's  career  as  Chief  Executive  ;  *  nevertheless,  it 
was  felt  that  Sumner  overshot  his  mark.  He  ar 
raigned  Grant  as  a  Borgia,  a  Farnese,  a  Barberini, 
"a  Caesar  plotting  against  the  peace  and  life  of  the 
Kepublic."  Such  denunciations  showed  an  utter 
misconception  of  Grant's  character.  Moreover, 
Sumner  injured  the  effect  of  his  words  by  making  no 
mention  of  the  general's  transcendent  service  to  the 
nation  during  the  war,  —  service  which  in  the  minds 
of  the  people  far  outweighed  the  venial  offenses 
which  Sumner  was  here  exaggerating.  Even  among 


ridiculed  Grant's  preparation  for  the  presidency. 
In  bad  taste  he  quoted  Stanton,  who  had  recently  died,  as  de 
claring  :  "  He  [Grant]  cannot  govern  this  country."  He  ar 
raigned  him  for  nepotism,  citing  newspaper  assertions  as  to  the 
number  of  his  relatives  who  had  become  holders  of  office.  He 
assailed  his  gift-taking  with  repayment  with  office,  and  rebuked 
him  for  quarrelsomeness,  declaring  that  he  spent  his  time  "  lis 
tening  to  stories  from  horse-cars,  gobbling  the  gossip  of  his  mil 
itary  ring,  discoursing  on  imaginary  griefs  and  nursing  an  unjust 
anger."  As  to  his  conduct  of  foreign  relations  he  declared: 
"  Here  the  President  touches  nothing  which  he  does  not  muddle. 
In  every  direction  is  muddle,  —  muddle  with  Spain,  muddle 
with  Cuba,  muddle  with  the  Black  Republic,  muddle  with  dis 
tant  Corea,  muddle  with  Venezuela,  muddle  with  Russia,  muddle 
with  England,  —  on  all  sides  one  diversified  muddle."  .  .  . 
';  I  dismiss  the  apologies  with  the  conclusion  that  in  matters  to 
which  they  invite  attention  his  presidency  is  an  enormous  fail 
ure."  —  "Republicanism  vs.  Grantisin,"  Works,  Vol.  XV,  pp. 
83-171. 


CLOSING  SCENES  419 

Grant's  opponents  there  was  a  feeling  that  Sumner' s 
arraignment  had  been  both  overwrought  and  ill- 
timed.  In  the  months  before  the  Cincinnati  con 
vention  it  might  have  united  the  opposition.  But 
it  was  now  too  late,  for  his  renoinination  and  (it  is 
not  too  much  to  say)  his  reelection  had  been  assured 
from  the  moment  Greeley  was  accepted  as  the  Lib 
eral  Republicans'  candidate.  Sunnier  always  held 
extravagant  notions  of  the  power  of  Senate  speeches 
to  determine  political  action;  at  the  end  of  his 
speech  he  firmly  believed  that  his  words  had  given 
the  coup  de  grace  to  Grant's  hopes  for  a  second  term, 
and  was  utterly  astounded  and  incredulous  when  a 
friend  expressed  doubt  whether  his  speech  would 
now  have  much  effect  upon  the  election.1 

Not  until  the  end  of  July  did  Sumner  declare  for 
whom  he  should  vote.  Then,  in  a  letter  to  colored 
citizens  who  sought  his  advice,  he  announced  his 
intention  to  support  Greeley  as  "  unquestionably 
the  surest  trust  of  the  colored  people. ' '  In  comment 
upon  this  letter  in  Harper's  Weekly,  Curtis  turned 
back  upon  Sumner  the  words  which  Sumuer  had 
used  to  him  upon  his  endorsement  of  Grant :  "  You 
have  taken  a  tremendous  responsibility.  God  keep 
your  conscience  clear  ! "  2 

*Carl  Schurz,  in  Massachusetts  Memorial  to  Sumner,  p.  241. 
When  Boutwell  expressed  the  belief  that  Grant  would  he  elected, 
Snraner  "  held  up  his  hands  and  in  a  tone  of  grief  said  :  'You 
and  Wilson  are  the  only  ones  who  tell  me  he  has  any  chance.'  " 
— Sixty  Years  in  Public  Affairs,  Vol.  II,  p.  217. 

2 Curtis  said  to  him  :  "The  slave  of  yesterday  in  Alahama, 
in  Carolina,  in  Missiasippi,  will  his  heart  leap  with  joy  or  droop 
dismayed  when  he  knows  that  Charles  Sumner  has  given  his 


420  CHAKLES  SUMNEK 

Sumner  wished  to  take  part  in  the  campaign, — 
at  least,  to  present  his  views  to  his  constituents  from 
the  platform  of  Faneuil  Hall.  But  the  summer 
found  him  so  seriously  unstrung  by  the  labors  and 
trials  of  the  recent  months  in  Congress  that  friend 
and  physician  united  in  insisting  upon  his  seeking 
relaxation  and  restoration  abroad.  On  the  morning 
that  he  sailed,  there  was  given  to  the  press  his  mes 
sage.  It  was  more  temperate  than  his  recent  speech 
in  its  attacks  upon  the  President  j  insisted  that  in 
all  his  labors  in  relation  to  reconstruction  he  had 
been  looking  forward  to  a  time  of  reconciliation ; 
and  rejoiced  at  the  acceptance  by  the  Democrats  of 
the  South  of  the  Cincinnati  platform  as  the  best 
pledge  that  the  era  of  harmony  was  at  hand. 

In  Liverpool  Sumner  was  met  by  the  unwelcome 
announcement  that  at  conventions  of  the  Democrats 
and  Liberal  Eepublicaus,  held  while  he  was  on  the 
ocean,  he  had  been  nominated  by  acclamation  for 
governor  of  Massachusetts.  The  object  in  using  his 
name  was  to  help  out  the  Greeley  campaign,  but 

great  name  as  a  club  to  smite  the  party  that  gave  him  and  his 
children  their  liberty?"  The  tears  started  to  his  eyes,  that 
good  gray  head  bowed  down,  but  he  answered  sadly,  "  I  must 
do  my  duty."  And  he  did  it. — Orations,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  246- 
247.  J.  M.  Forbes  was  another  friend  who  besought  Sumner 
to  reverse  his  decision  :  "Nobody  knows  better  than  you  that 
when  his  kindness  of  heart,  his  fear  of  violence,  or  his  prejudices 
and  hobbies  are  concerned,  Greeley  can  never  be  depended  on 
in  a  pinch.  .  .  .  Now  you  are  the  very  antipode  of  Greeley 
in  firmness  and  tenacity  of' purpose.  You  may  for  a  while  act 
as  a  balance-wheel,  but  with  his  Democratic  millions  at  his  back 
I  have  not  the  slightest  hope  that  you  can  keep  him  out  of  the 
reactionary  vortex  (if  he  should  be  elected;.?'— Letters  and  Recol 
lections,  Vol.  II,  p.  182. 


CLOSING  SCENES  421' 

/  A' 

Sumner  immediately  sent  au  absolute  refusal  to  ac 
cept  the  nomination,  and  another  name  was  substi 
tuted. 

After  a  wearying  week  in  London,  he  went  to 
Paris,  where  he  spent  a  month,  receiving  inauy 
kind  attentions  from  French  and  American  friends. 
He  was  much  disappointed  at  not  finding  there 
Dr.  Brown -Sequard,  who  had  recently  gone  to 
America.  He  seemed  far  from  well,  and  greatly 
depressed.  To  a  friend  he  declared  :  "I  know  the 
integrity  of  my  conduct  and  the  motives  of  my  life. 
Never  were  they  more  clear  or  absolutely  blame 
less  than  now.  But  never  in  the  worst  days  of 
slavery  have  I  been  more  vindictively  pursued  or 
more  falsely  misrepresented. "  He  found  stimulus 
and  relief  from  his  depression  in  indulging  his 
eager  quest  for  rare  books  and  manuscripts.  He 
had  interesting  interviews  with  Laboulaye,  Thiers, 
the  Due  d'Aumale  and  with  Gambetta,  whom  he 
had  much  wished  to  meet.  As  they  parted,  Sum 
ner  said:  "I  am  not  French,  and  I  know  your 
country  too  little  to  be  justified  in  pronouncing 
judgment  on  her  political  principles  ;  but  you  wish 
to  found  a  republic  without  religion.  In  America 
we  should  consider  such  an  undertaking  chimerical 
and  doomed  to  certain  defeat." 

After  a  couple  of  days  with  Motley  at  The  Hague, 
Sumner  returned  to  London,  where  he  spent  much 
time  in  the  libraries  and  galleries,  and  in  col 
lecting  curios.  In  these  weeks  in  London  and  Paris 
he  expended  about  six  thousand  dollars  for  auto- 


422  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

graphs  and  literary  rarities.  Unfortunately,  he 
had  gained  little  skill  as  a  bargainer  or  as  a  con 
noisseur,  so  that  as  a  purchaser  he  was  the  delight 
of  the  dealers. 

The  morning  before  he  left  London  for  the  last 
time,  he  breakfasted  with  Dean  and  Lady  Stanley  ; 
he  was  next  the  guest  of  the  Duke  of  Devonshire  at 
Chatsworth  j  regretfully  declining  an  invitation  to 
visit  the  Duke  and  Duchess  of  Argyll  because  of 
the  length  of  the  journey,  he  spent  his  last  night  in 
England  with  John  Bright.  The  conversation  took 
a  wide  range,  but  Bright  noted  * '  a  great  gentleness 
in  all  he  said,  with  a  sadness  and  a  melancholy 
which  left  upon  us  the  impression  that  he  felt  him 
self  seriously  ill,  and  that  his  life  of  work  was  nearly 
ended."  Upon  landing  in  New  York,  he  was  much 
saddened  to  learn  of  the  illness,  soon  followed  by 
the  death,  of  Greeley,  broken-hearted  by  the  loss  of 
his  wife  and  by  his  disastrous  defeat. 

It  was  a  depressing  session  upon  which  Sumner 
was  now  to  cuter.  His  health  was  so  poor  that  he 
was  obliged  to  ask  relief  from  committee  service. 
He  went  to  the  Senate  daily  for  about  two  weeks, 
during  which  he  did  not  neglect  to  urge  his  Civil 
Eights  Bill  and  a  bill  to  prevent  race  discrimina 
tions  in  the  schools  of  the  District  of  Columbia. 
But  from  the  middle  of  December  to  the  close  of  the 
session  he  was  compelled  to  absent  himself  from  his 
seat ;  in  the  special  session  beginning  in  March,  he 
appeared  but  once,  to  present  the  credentials  of  his 
new  colleague  from  Massachusetts.  The  call  for  the 


CLOSING  SCENES  423 

Eepublican  caucus  at  the  opening  of  this  session  was 
addressed  only  to  those  who  had  supported  the 
Eepublican  platform  and  Grant,  and  no  committee 
assignment  was  made  by  the  caucus  to  Sumner  or  to 
any  other  member  who  had  voted  for  Greeley. 

Probably  no  act  of  Sumuer's  political  life  led  to 
more  unexpected  results  than  did  the  introduction 
by  him  of  a  certain  bill  early  in  the  regular  session.1 
Its  main  provision  ran  as  follows  :  "  Whereas  the 
national  unity  and  good- will  among  fellow- citizens 
can  be  assured  only  through  oblivion  of  past  differ 
ences,  and  it  is  contrary  to  the  usage  of  civilized 
nations  to  perpetuate  the  memory  of  civil  war  ; 
therefore,  be  it  resolved,  etc.,  that  the  names  of 
battles  with  fellow-citizens  shall  not  be  continued  in 
the  Army  Eegister,  or  placed  on  the  regimental 
colors  of  the  United  States."  In  previous  years 
Sumner  had  introduced  measures  of  similar  char 
acter  which  had  received  the  cordial  approval  of 
General  Scott  and  General  Anderson  ; 2  they  had 
aroused  no  wide  spread  attention,  still  less  opposi 
tion.  But  now,  although  the  war  spirit  might  be 
supposed  to  be  allayed,  apparently  there  was  a  dis 
position  to  exact  from  Sumner  the  penalty  for  his 
desertion  of  the  party.  In  the  House,  a  bill  of  pre 
cisely  opposite  intent  was  hastily  passed,  and  op 
position  was  announced  in  the  Senate ;  but  both 
measures  were  there  laid  upon  the  table  because  of 
Summer's  illness. 

1  December  2,  1872.      Works,  Vol.  XV,  p.  255. 
9  Supra,  p.  262. 


424  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

It  happened  that  at  the  time  when  he  introduced 
this  bill  there  was  being  held  a  special  session  of  the 
Massachusetts  legislature, — "a  dead  legislature, 
galvanized  into  life  by  the  governor's  proclama 
tion  ' '  solely  to  attend  to  matters  connected  with  the 
great  fire  in  Boston.  Sumner's  bill  caught  the  eye 
of  an  ex- soldier,  who  brought  in  a  resolution 
strongly  denouncing  it.  The  end  of  the  session  was 
close  at  hand  and  less  than  one-fourth  of  those  there 
present  had  been  reflected  to  the  new  legislature 
which  was  to  meet  within  three  or  four  weeks. 
Members  therefore  acted  under  little  sense  of  re 
sponsibility,  and  in  fact  with  slight  observance  of 
parliamentary  formalities.  An  irregular  report 
from  the  committee  to  which  the  matter  had  been 
referred  denounced  Sumner's  bill  as  "  an  insult  to 
the  loyal  soldiery  of  the  nation"  and  as  " meeting 
the  unqualified  condemnation  of  the  people  of  the 
common  wealth. "  The  debate  upon  the  report  was 
crowded  into  two  days,  and  despite  vigorous  op 
position,  led  by  Colonel  Charles  E.  Codman,  it  was 
adopted,  largely  owing  to  the  insistence  that  it  was 
demanded  by  the  old  soldiers.  So  hurried  had 
been  the  procedure  that  it  took  the  public  by  sur 
prise.  But  the  press  and  even  the  pulpit  now  came 
promptly  to  Sumner's  defense.  Whittier  took  the 
lead  in  a  movement  to  secure  the  rescinding  of  the 
resolution  of  censure,  and  a  petition,  signed  by 
more  than  5, 000  names,  including  those  most  eminent 
in  the  commonwealth,  was  promptly  presented  to 
the  new  legislature  and  reinforced  by  an  appeal, 


CLOSING  SCENES  425 

signed  by  distinguished  men  from  all  over  the 
country,  including  Chief-Justice  Chase,  William 
Cullen  Bryant,  and  Frederick  Douglass.  The  peti 
tioners  were  more  vigorously  than  tactfully  repre 
sented  before  the  committee  by  ex -Governors  Clan*  in 
and  Washburn  and  by  the  Eev.  James  Freeman 
Clarke.  Senators  and  representatives  who  had 
been  members  of  the  previous  legislature  took 
offense  at  criticisms  passed  upon  that  body  ;  there 
was  also  surprising  opposition  from  William  Lloyd 
Garrison  and  from  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe,  who  had 
been  one  of  the  petitioners  for  rescinding.  Much 
was  made  of  the  alleged  "  soldier  feeling  "  against 
Suumer's  bill,  and  the  point  was  urged  that  it  was 
not  competent  for  the  present  legislature  to  revoke 
a  resolution  of  its  predecessor.  The  result  was  that, 
while  the  public  came  to  see  Sumner's  proposition 
in  its  true  light,  the  legislature,  by  large  majorities, 
refused  to  annul  the  censure. 

Sumner  grieved  over  an  injustice,  which,  had  he 
been  in  health,  he  might  have  regarded  with  indif 
ference.  He  longed  to  defend  himself  in  the  Senate, 
and  would  have  attempted  it  at  the  risk  of  his  life, 
had  his  physician  not  warned  him  that  the  strain 
might  cause  prolonged  mental  disability,  the  fate 
which  he  had  always  most  dreaded.  Months  of  en 
forced  absence  from  his  place  in  the  Senate  made 
him  morbid.  To  Vice- President  Wilson  he  said : 
"  If  my  Works  were  completed,  and  my  Civil  Eights 
Bill  passed,  no  visitor  could  enter  that  door  that 
would  be  more  welcome  than  Death."  Yet  he  was 


426  CHAELES  SUMNER 

the  recipient  of  many  letters  of  sympathy,  and  with 
the  coming  of  spring  he  began  to  show  signs  of  im 
provement,  so  that  he  could  take  drives  and  spend 
some  time  each  day  at  the  Congressional  Library  in 
the  revision  and  annotation  of  his  Works.  Wilson 
and  he  were  soon  to  be  brought  into  deeper  sympa 
thy,  for  the  Vice- President  was  stricken  by  paralysis 
in  May,  so  that  both  these  friends  and  comrades  of 
many  years  were  to  know  months  of  disheartening 
interruption  of  their  public  service  and  of  anxious 
eifort  to  force  their  enfeebled  powers  in  literary 
tasks  which  neither  was  to  bring  to  completion. 
Sumner's  friends  urged  him  again  to  seek  health 
abroad,  but  he  felt  that  he  could  not  aiford  such  a 
vacation  trip,  and  even  made  arrangements  for  a 
long  lecture  tour  in  the  fall,  in  order  to  pay  off 
something  of  the  indebtedness  incurred  by  his  previ 
ous  lavish  expenditures  in  Europe,  and  by  his  costly 
illness.  But  Wendell  Phillips  and  other  friends  in 
sisted  upon  his  canceling  these  engagements  and 
husbanding  his  strength. 

The  months  before  the  assembling  of  Congress 
brought  him  much  cheer.  He  was  gratified  by  an 
election  to  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society, 
from  which  his  anti-slavery  views  had  doubtless 
debarred  him  in  his  early  manhood.  He  had 
happy  reunions  with  Longfellow,  Agassiz,  Emerson, 
Holmes,  Judge  Hoar,  and  others  at  the  monthly 
dinner  of  the  Saturday  Club,  and  he  was  cordially 
received  at  many  gatherings  of  business  and  literary 
men.  It  was  a  joy  in  these  last  y oars  of  his  life  to 


CLOSING  SCENES  427 

reknit  his  intimacy  with  Hillard,  from  whom  slavery 
dissensions  had  parted  him.  Hillard  had  shown 
great  tenderness  toward  him  as  he  sailed  for  Europe, 
the  previous  year,  and  now,  though  stricken  with 
paralysis,  he  welcomed  Sunmer  to  his  home,  and  for 
the  last  time  the  two  renewed  many  fond  memories. l 
Shortly  before  his  return  to  Congress,  Sumner  did 
a  public  service  in  connection  with  the  Virginias 
case.  The  seizure  of  this  vessel  while  flying  the 
American  flag  and  the  execution  of  a  considerable 
number  of  the  men  who  had  been  aboard  her,  aroused 
intense  feeling,  and  a  great  public  meeting  was  pro 
jected  in  New  York  to  voice  the  popular  indignation 
against  Spain.  Sumner  was  invited  to  be  one  of  the 
speakers,  but  instead  of  accepting  he  sent  a  letter  in 
which  he  advised  delay  and  calm  investigation  of  the 


^ne  incident  of  Sumner's  last  dinner  with  Hillard  is  of  in 
terest.  "The  old  cook  had  been  a  slave  in  Georgia,  and  was 
greatly  excited  over  the  preparations  of  a  dinner  for  the  man 
who  was  to  her  the  deliverer  of  her  race.  Mr.  Hillard  told  Mr. 
Sumner  what  a  solemn  occasion  it  was  to  her.  Mr.  Rumner 
said  it  was  the  custom  in  some  places  to  send  a  glass  of  wine  to 
the  cook  when  the  dinner  was  unusually  good,  and  begged  per 
mission  to  do  so,  which  he  did,  rendering  the  old  woman  almost 
beside  herself  with  pride.  The  servants  had  told  me  of  their 
earnest  desire  to  see  the  great  man,  and  I  asked  Mr.  Sumner  if 
he  could  gratify  them.  He  assented,  simply  and  readily.  I 
shall  never  forget  how  he  looked  as  he  stood  in  the  doorway  of 
the  dining-room,  almost  filling  it  in  height  and  breadth,  while 
those  two  poor,  homely  black  women,  one  of  them  scarred  by 
injuries  received  in  slavery,  reverently  kissed  his  hand.  It  was 
a  scene  full  of  significance.  We  looked  on  with  wet  eyes  ;  but 
he  was  rather  embarrassed,  and  glad  to  escape  up-stairs.  I  also 
remember  that  the  kitchen  department  was  demoralized  for 
some  days  following."  Told  by  an  eye-witness.  Pierce, 
Vol.  IV,  p.  570. 


428  CHARLES  STJMNER 

facts,  deprecating  the  war  spirit  and  preparations 
which  the  meeting  bade  fair  to  excite.  In  an  inter 
view  in  the  Tribune  he  elaborated  these  views  with 
very  salutary  effect.  His  efforts  called  forth  most 
hearty  approval  from  the  judicious,  and  it  was  pres 
ently  shown  that  the  facts  of  the  case  afforded  not 
the  slightest  warrant  for  the  furore  into  which  hot 
heads  were  striving  to  plunge  the  country. 

Despite  his  recent  differences  with  the  administra 
tion  and  the  censure  of  the  Massachusetts  legislature, 
Sumner  found  on  all  sides  assurances  of  popular  re 
gard  ;  and  he  returned  to  Washington  with  the  con 
sciousness  that  at  no  period  of  his  public  service 
had  the  heart  of  Massachusetts  been  more  with  him. 
Nothing  was  more  certain  than  that  the  censure 
would  be  speedily  removed  and  that  his  reelection 
to  the  Senate  in  1875  would  be  unchallenged. 

A  cordial  greeting  awaited  Sumner  at  the  open 
ing  of  Congress,  but  his  assignment  to  a  low  place 
on  two  committees  with  which  he  had  never  been 
associated  indicated  that  he  was  not  considered  a 
Republican.  Senior  senator  in  length  of  service,  he 
seized  the  first  opportunity  to  introduce  a  list  of  eight 
measures  which  he  intended  to  urge.  Foremost  in 
his  interests  was  the  Civil  Rights  Bill  introduced 
by  him  in  1870.  Never  vindictive,  the  policies  he 
now  advocated  were  those  which  he  believed  would 
soonest  heal  the  breach.  Even  in  the  heat  of  the 
Grant  campaign  his  counsel  had  been  :  "  Nothing  in 
haste.  Nothing  in  vengeance.  Nothing  in  passion. 
I  am  for  gentleness.  I  am  for  a  v  el  vet  glove  j  but 


CLOSING  SCENES  429 

for  a  while  I  wish  the  hand  of  iron."  In  urging  his 
favorite  measure  in  the  Senate,  he  showed  the  same 
magnanimity.  "Sir,  my  desire,  the  darling  desire, 
if  I  may  say  so,  of  my  soul,  at  this  moment,  is  to 
close  forever  this  question  so  that  it  shall  never 
again  intrude  into  these  chambers — so  that  hereafter, 
in  all  our  legislation,  there  shall  be  no  such  word  as 
'black'  or  i  white,'  but  that  we  shall  speak  only  of 
citizens  and  of  men."  He  now  desired  that  the  bill 
should  be  acted  upon  directly  by  the  Senate.  Refer 
ence  to  a  committee  was  insisted  upon,  but  the  de 
bate  indicated  that  sentiment  was  more  friendly 
than  formerly  both  to  Sumuer  and  to  his  favorite 
measure.  The  report  was  not  made  until  several 
weeks  later  ;  with  trifling  changes  the  bill  was  then 
passed  by  the  Senate  by  a  party  vote  of  twenty-nine 
to  sixteen.  It  prohibited  discriminations  on  account 
of  race  or  color  in  inns,  public  conveyances,  theatres, 
schools,  cemeteries  and  juries.1 

1The  House,  however,  did  not  act  upon  this  measure  and  it 
was  not  till  a  year  later  (February,  1875)  that  a  civil  rights 
bill,  originating  in  the  House,  and  omitting  the  prohibitions  as 
to  schools — which  Sumner  would  have  considered  fundamentally 
essential — and  as  to  cemeteries,  became  a  law.  Eight  years 
later  the  Supreme  Court  annulled  this  Act  on  the  ground  that 
the  discriminations  which  it  prohibited  were  not  incidents  or 
elements  of  slavery,  and  hence  subject  to  the  power  of  Congress 
under  the  Thirteenth  Amendment,  and  that  under  the  Four 
teenth  Amendment,  while  Congress  might  possibly  legislate  in 
correction  of  state  laws  held  to  infringe  civil  rights,  it  might  not 
impose  these  prohibitions  directly  upon  citizens  of  the  individual 
states.  Sumner 's  reply  would  have  been  his  dictum,  "Whatever 
is  for  human  rights  is  constitutional."  Fortunately  time  had 
already  proved  that  the  need  for  such  drastic  legislation  was  not 
so  great  as  Sumner  had  believed. 


430  CHARLES  SUMNER 

Sumner'  s  devotion  to  this  movement  for  the  pro 
tection  of  civil  rights  was  the  explanation  of  his 
supporting  both  by  voice  and  vote  the  nomination 
of  Caleb  Gushing  for  Chief- Justice  of  the  Supreme 
Court.  Cush ing's  career  and  party  allegiance  had 
been  marked  by  great  inconsistency.  Up  to  the 
actual  outbreak  of  the  war  he  had  been  a  zealous 
partisan  of  the  South,  his  indiscreet  utterances  and 
actions  on  several  occasions  having  caused  much 
annoyance  to  the  Federal  government.  It  had  been 
his  opposition  more  than  that  of  any  other  one  man 
which  delayed  for  three  months  Sumner' s  first  elec 
tion  to  the  Senate  by  the  deadlock  in  the  Massachu 
setts  legislature.  Sumner,  as  he  truly  said  of  him 
self,  u  did  not  cherish  old  differences  and  animosi 
ties."  Of  late  years  Gushing  had  come  into  close 
sympathy  with  the  government,  and  Sumner  had 
greatly  prized  his  genial  and  intelligent  friendship  ; 
so,  in  spite  of  the  man's  inconsistent  record  and  the 
personal  opposition  which  he  had  shown  Sumner 
years  before,  when  once  the  senator  became  con 
vinced  that  Gushing  was  now  in  sympathy  with  his 
own  views  on  the  Civil  Rights  Bill,  against  the 
urging  of  most  of  his  Massachusetts  advisers  and 
friends,  he  warmly  supported  Gushing' s  nomination. 
The  name  was  withdrawn,  however,  when  it  became 
known  that  even  after  Lincoln's  inauguration,  Gush 
ing  had  been  in  friendly  correspondence  with  Jeffer 
son  Davis. 

In  February,  1874,  Sumuer  was  actively  engaged 
upon  the  annotation  of  his  Works,  devoting  especial 


CLOSING  SCENES  431 

attention  to  his  "  Prophetic  Voices  Concerning  Amer 
ica,''  which  was  to  be  given  separate  publication  as 
appropriate  to  the  centenary  of  American  independ 
ence.  In  fact  the  very  last  measure  which  Suinner 
debated  was  the  bill  providing  for  the  Centennial 
Exposition  at  Philadelphia.  He  was  heartily  in 
favor  of  a  dignified  national  commemoration  of  the 
great  anniversary,  but  earnestly  opposed  what  he 
characterized  as  "  the  monstrosity  of  a  world's  fair 
linked  with  the  commemoration  of  the  national 
natal  day." 

Early  in  1874  the  new  Massachusetts  legislature 
by  large  majorities  rescinded  and  annulled  the 
resolution  of  censure  passed  upon  Suniner  two  years 
before  for  his  "battle-flag"  resolution.  Whittier 
was  jubilant,  and  proud  that,  like  Benton  in  the 
case  of  the  Senate's  censure  of  Jackson,  "  solitary 
and  alone  I  set  the  ball  in  motion."  A  colored 
friend  of  Sumner's,  who  had  been  on  the  committee 
which  reported  the  rescinding  resolution,  was 
deputed  to  take  it  to  Washington.1  It  was  promptly 
brought  to  the  attention  of  the  House,  but  in  the 
Senate  its  presentation  was  delayed  because  of  the 
illness  of  Sumner's  colleague  from  Massachusetts. 

This  act  of  justice  was  a  great  comfort  to  Sumner. 

1  In  speaking  of  the  sympathy  and  sensitiveness  which  under 
lay  Sumner's  stately  manner,  N.  P.  Banks  said  that  when  these 
resolutions  were  presented  to  Sumner,  "  he  received  them  with 
equanimity ;  he  spoke  a  few  words  of  one  or  two  gentlemen 
connected  with  the  [Massachusetts]  government,  whom  he 
knew,  and  then,  overcome  with  emotion,  wept  as  a  child." 
Address  before  Mass.  Senate,  March  13,  1874. 


432  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

He  did  not  care  to  address  the  Senate  upon  it : 
"  The  dear  old  commonwealth  has  spoken  for  me, 
and  that  is  enough."  The  joy  that  he  had  thus 
been  vindicated  came  at  a  time  when  solace  was 
sadly  needed,  for  early  in  March  he  suffered  severe 
pains  in  the  heart  and  could  find  relief  and  sleep 
only  by  the  use  of  opiates.  On  the  10th,  against  his 
physician's  advice,  he  went  to  the  Senate,  for  on  that 
day  Senator  Boutwell  was  to  leave  his  sick-room  for 
the  first  time  in  order  to  present  the  rescinding 
resolution.  There  have  been  few  occasions  in  his 
tory  on  which  a  statesman  has  been  thus  formally 
tendered  a  signal  act  of  reparation,  and  Sumner' s 
colleagues  were  generous  in  their  expressions  of 
congratulation  and  good-will.  It  was  a  fitting  close 
to  a  career  which  had  often  brought  him  into 
courageous  conflict  with  popular  sentiment.  As 
Charles  Sumner  left  the  Senate  chamber,  that  March 
afternoon,  with  the  words  of  vindication  from  "  the 
dear  old  commonwealth  "  still  in  his  ears,  friends 
noted  with  foreboding  how  haggard  and  ill  he  ap 
peared.  He  was  never  to  enter  its  doors  again. 

That  evening  two  old  friends  sat  long  with  him 
at  dinner.  Hardly  had  they  gone,  when  Sumner 
was  prostrated  by  a  severe  attack  of  pain  at  the 
heart.  It  was  soon  seen  that  the  final  struggle  was 
at  hand.  Physicians  and  friends  did  everything 
to  alleviate  his  sufferings.  Schurz  and  Hoar  were 
constantly  by  his  side.  Two  colored  men,  friends 
of  many  years,  served  him  now  with  the  devotion  of 
their  race.  In  his  moments  of  consciousness  he 


CLOSING  SCENES  433 

moaned,  "My  book,  my  unfinished  book  !"  Even 
more  upon  his  mind  in  these  last  hours  was  the 
cause  for  which  he  had  worked  so  hard  ;  again  and 
again  he  said  to  Judge  Hoar:  "  You  must  take  | 
care  of  the  Civil  Eights  Bill,— my  bill,  the  Civil 
Eights  Bill,— don't  let  it  fail!"  Almost  his  last  \ 
message  was  :  "  Tell  Emerson  how  much  I  love  and 
revere  him."  Judge  Hoar  promised  to  do  so,  and 
added  :  "  He  said  of  you  once  that  he  never  knew 
so  white  a  soul."  The  words  of  that  beautiful 
tribute  were  almost  the  last  which  fell  upon  the  ear 
of  the  dying  man.  The  end  came  in  the  middle  of 
the  afternoon,  March  llth.  As  he  laid  down  the 
hand  he  had  been  holding,  Judge  Hoar  broke  the 
silence:  "Well  done,  good  and  faithful  servant, 
enter  thou  into  the  joy  of  thy  Lord  !  " 

The  announcement  of  Sumner's  death  came  with 
a  shock  of  surprise  to  the  country,  and  "  in  many 
quiet  homes,  in  many  a  cabin  of  the  poor  and  lowly, 
there  was  inexpressible  tenderness  and  profound 
sorrow."  *  Both  houses  of  Congress  immediately 
adjourned.  The  following  day,  by  their  joint  action 
the  nation  took  the  statesman's  body  into  its  keep 
ing  as  a  trust  to  be  delivered  to  the  commonwealth 
which  he  had  so  long  served  and  so  dearly  loved. 
On  a  bleak  March  morning  the  funeral  procession, 
led  by  a  body  of  negroes  headed  by  Frederick 
Douglass,  made  its  way  from  Simmer's  home  to  the 
Capitol.  Here  the  body  lay  in  state  in  the  rotunda, 
and  was  viewed  by  thousands.  The  funeral  service 
1  Judge  E.  R.  Hoar,  in  the  House  of  Representatives. 


434  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

was  held  in  the  Senate  chamber,  in  the  presence  of 
the  President  and  cabinet,  and  a  great  concourse  of 
those  among  whom  his  life-work  had  been  done. 
From  Washington  the  body  was  borne  with  large 
escort  to  his  native  city,  meeting  upon  its  journey 
many  evidences  of  the  deep  grief  of  the  people.  A 
throng  of  Sumner's  townsmen  awaited  his  last  home 
coming.  In  the  rotunda  of  the  State  House  Senator 
Anthony,  addressing  the  governor,  rendered  back  to 
Massachusetts  her  illustrious  dead.  Here  all  day 
Sunday,  guarded  by  colored  soldiers,  the  body  lay, 
while  sorrowing  thousands  filed  past.  It  was  signifi 
cant  that  Hayti,  by  the  hand  of  her  minister,  sent 
her  tribute  of  affection  and  gratitude  to  the  man 
who  had  championed  her  right  to  national  recogni 
tion,  and  who  had  later  defended  her  menaced  in 
dependence.  The  funeral  service  was  held  in  King's 
Chapel,  and  thence  this  son  of  Boston,  once  so 
maligned  but  now  so  universally  mourned,  was 
borne  over  the  Harvard  bridge  which  he  had  so 
often  trod,  past  the  halls  of  the  college  he  loved,  to 
Mt.  Auburn,  the  resting-place  of  the  noble  friends 
of  his  youth  and  manhood.  Sumner's  was  a  lonely 
life  and  a  lonely  death  :  among  all  those  sorrowing 
thousands  from  the  Senate  chamber  in  Washington 
to  Mt.  Auburn  there  was  not  one  man  of  his  own 
kin.  But  at  his  open  grave  stood  the  stricken  Vice- 
President,  his  comrade  in  a  quarter  of  a  century  of 
struggle,  and  Longfellow,  Holmes,  Whittier  and  Em 
erson,  whose  friendship  had  been  to  him  both  solace 
and  inspiration. 


CLOSING  SCENES  435 

In  death  Suinner  was  accorded  in  full  measure  ap 
preciation  and  praise  which  had  beeii  grudgingly 
given  him  in  life.  Preachers  extolled  his  career  and 
service,  and  the  press  teemed  with  kindly  tributes. 
On  the  day  set  apart  for  his  commemoration  by 
Congress,  nothing  was  more  significant  than  the 
evidence,  not  in  fulsome  and  conventional  eulogy 
but  in  words  of  genuine  grief,  that  even  long-time 
opponents  had  come  to  know  the  real  character  of 
the  man.  Not  only  was  he  recognized  as  "  the 
chief  inspiring  cause  and  guiding  spirit  of  the  anti- 
slavery  revolution,"  but,  as  Senator  Sherman  de 
clared,  now  that  strife  and  personal  feeling  inevitably 
aroused  by  the  heat  of  recent  contests  in  the  Senate 
were  passing  away,  ' '  Charles  Suniner  was  by  the 
j  udguient  of  his  associates  here,  by  the  confidence  of 
his  constituents,  by  the  general  voice  of  the  people, 
the  foremost  man  in  the  civil  service  of  the  United 
States."  The  commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  and 
the  city  of  Boston  both  honored  their  distinguished 
son,  calling  to  their  service  the  loving  eloquence  of 
George  William  Curtis  and  Carl  Schurz. 

Two  years  before  his  death  it  is  probable  that  no 
man,  with  the  possible  exception  of  Thaddeus 
Stevens,  was  so  cordially  hated  throughout  the 
South  as  was  Charles  Suniner.  Yet  the  most  sym 
pathetically  discerning  characterization  of  this 
great  "  pioneer  of  agitation  "  came  in  tender  words 
fall  of  prophetic  import  from  the  lips  of  a  Confed 
erate  soldier  and  statesman.  Never  had  Lamar 
spoken  "with  a  purpose  more  single  to  the  interests 


436  CHARLES  SUMNEE 

of  our  Southern  people"  than  when  from  his  place 
in  the  House  of  Representatives  he  paid  a  tribute  to 
Charles  Sumuer  in  words  full  of  hopeful  significance 
that  the  antagonisms  aroused  by  slavery,  and  civil 
war,  and  reconstruction  were  swiftly  passing  away. 
Said  he:  lt  Charles  Simmer  was  born  with  an  in 
stinctive  love  of  freedom,  and  was  educated  from 
his  earliest  infancy  to  the  belief  that  freedom  is  the 
natural  and  indefeasible  right  of  every  intelligent 
being  having  the  outward  form  of  man.  .  .  . 
And  along  with  this  all-controlling  love  of  freedom, 
he  possessed  a  moral  sensibility  keenly  intense  and 
vivid,  a  conscientiousness  which  would  never  per 
mit  him  to  swerve  by  the  breadth  of  a  hair  from 
what  he  pictured  to  himself  as  the  path  of  duty. 
There  were  combined  in  him  the  characteristics 
which  have  in  all  ages  given  to  religion  her  martyrs, 
to  patriotism  her  self-sacrificing  heroes.  To  a  man 
thoroughly  permeated  and  imbued  with  such  a 
creed  and  animated  and  constantly  actuated  by  such 
a  spirit  of  devotion,  to  behold  a  human  being  or 
a  race  of  human  beings  restrained  of  their  natural 
rights  to  liberty,  for  no  crime  by  him  or  them  com 
mitted,  was  to  feel  all  the  belligerent  instincts  of 
his  nature  roused  to  combat.  The  fact  was  to  him 
a  wrong  which  no  logic  could  justify."  Yet  "  in 
this  fiery  zeal  and  this  earnest  warfare  against  the 
wrong,  as  he  viewed  it,  there  entered  no  enduring 
personal  animosity  toward  the  men  whose  lot  it  was 
to  be  born  to  the  system  which  he  denounced." 
Lamar  spoke  with  deep  feeling  of  the  kindness  of 


CLOSING  SCENES  437 

sympathy  which,  in  his  later  years,  Sumner  had 
displayed  toward  the  impoverished  and  suffering 
people  of  the  South,  and  of  the  gracious  magnanim 
ity  which  had  prompted  his  "battle-flag"  resolu 
tion.  "Charles  Sumner  in  life  believed  that  all 
occasion  for  strife  and  distrust  between  the  North 
and  South  had  passed  away,  and  there  no  longer  re 
mained  any  cause  for  continued  estrangement  be 
tween  these  two  sections  of  our  common  country. 
.  .  .  Would  that  the  spirit  of  the  illustrious  dead 
whom  we  lament  to-day  could  speak  from  the  grave 
to  both  parties  to  this  deplorable  discord  in  tones 
which  should  reach  each  and  every  heart  through 
out  this  broad  territory,  i  My  countrymen,  know  one 
another  and  you  will  love  one  another.' ' 


CHAPTER  XX 

SUMNER' s  LEADERSHIP 

JUDICIOUS  historians  of  the  United  States  in  the 
second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  have  accorded 
to  Sumner  in  the  years  immediately  following  the 
Civil  War  a  position  of  power  and  influence  second 
only  to  that  of  Grant.  To  the  reader  bora  since  the 
war  and  unprepared  by  special  study  of  that  period, 
this  judgment  comes  as  a  surprise.  Sunmer's  figure 
looms  larger  on  the  historian's  page  than  in  the 
popular  mind,  where  he  has  been  crowded  into  the 
background  by  famous  generals,  or  executives,  or 
legislators  whose  names  are  directly  associated  with 
some  great  constructive  act.1 

1Not  altogether  without  significance  as  corroborating  thia 
statement  are  certain  Massachusetts  college  entrance  examina 
tion  papers  which  have  come  under  the  writer's  eye  within  the 
past  few  months.  ''  A  brief  account  of  the  life  and  public  serv 
ices  of  Charles  Sumner  "  was  called  for.  Very  few  of  the  papers 
showed  any  accurate  focussing  upon  the  man  ;  the  great  majority 
indicated  little  more  than  that  he  was  an  anti-slavery  orator,  who 
was  assaulted  in  the  Senate.  Among  the  answers  were  the  fol 
lowing  :  "Sumner  was  an  Englishman  who  came  to  the  Colonies 
before  the  Revolution.  He  helped  by  giving  food  and  clothing 
and  would  not  receive  any  pay. "  "  Sumner  was  always  held  in 
respect  even  by  the  people  of  the  South.  Fort  Sumner,  Charles- 
town,  was  named  in  his  honor."  Another  goes  more  into  detail  : 
11  When  the  Civil  War  broke  out  he  was  in  command  at  Fort 
Sumter.  He  held  that  fort  as  long  as  possible  and  then  sailed 
to  New  York.  He  continued  fighting  for  the  North  throughout 
the  war  and  at  its  close  he  hoisted  the  flag  which  he  was  forced 


SUMMER'S  LEADERSHIP  439 

The  reasons  are  not  far  to  seek.  Sumuer's  great 
est  services,  and  those  he  was  best  fitted  to  perform, 
were  rendered  before  and  during  the  Civil  War,  and 
were  in  a  way  merged  in  its  results.  There  was 
significance  in  his  very  name  :  its  early  English 
form  was  Suinmoner, — "  the  title  of  officers  whose 
duty  it  was  to  summon  parties  into  courts."  l  Suin- 
ner's  place  in  history  is  that  of  the  Suniuioner  of 
Slavery  before  the  bar  of  the  civilized  world.  The 
"Crime  against  Kansas "  and  "The  Barbarism  of 
Slavery  "  placed  him  in  the  front  rank  of  the  leaders 
of  the  rapidly  approaching  revolution.  That  he 
became  a  dominant  factor  in  the  attempted  solution 
of  the  critical  problems  of  reconstruction  was  due  to 
a  complex  of  causes,  among  which  his  arguments 
and  eloquence  were  far  from  being  the  most  impor 
tant.2 

Stunner  was  an  idealist.  He  combined  the  un 
to  haul  down  by  the  Confederates  over  Fort  Sumter."  A  con 
siderable  number  of  other  papers  associated  Sumuer  with  Fort 
Sumter.  Of  course  these  papers  were  not  of  average  intelli 
gence.  But  that  so  large  a  proportion  of  this  group  of  appli 
cants  for  admission  to  a  college  in  the  commonwealth  which 
Sumner  served  so  long  and  with  such  distinction  could  show 
such  abysmal  ignorance  of  the  man  and  of  his  work  at  the  end 
of  a  single  generation  from  the  time  of  his  death,  does  seem  to 
confirm  the  statement  that  Sumner's  fame,  as  compared  with 
that  of  less  influential  leaders  of  his  time,  has  suffered  some 
thing  of  an  eclipse. 

1  Pierce,  Vol.  I,  p.  1. 

3  G.  S.  Boutwell  suggests  an  interesting  comparison  between 
Sumner  and  Samuel  Adams,  each  of  whom  showed  more  skill 
and  intelligence  in  organizing  the  forces  that  brought  on  a  rev 
olution  than  in  reconstructing  the  government  upon  the  basis  of 
the  new  conditions  that  had  been  created  by  that  revolution. 
—Sixty  Years  in  Public  Affairs,  Vol.  II,  p.  220. 


440  CHARLES  SUMNER 

yielding  conscience  of  the  Puritan  with,  the  burning 
zeal  of  a  Hebrew  prophet.  He  showed  himself  a 
prophet  many  times  in  his  prevision  of  changes  in 
popular  sentiment  quite  beyond  the  sight  of  the 
shrewd  politician.  And  he  was  a  prophet,  too,  like 
Amos  of  old,  in  his  fearless  showing  forth  of  the 
evils  of  his  day,  and  in  preaching  righteousness  and 
a  judgment  to  come.  Now  there  are  diversities  of 
gifts.  If  all  men  were  prophets,  where  were  the 
making  of  laws  or  the  administering  of  government  ? 
Sumner,  like  all  prophets,  was  by  nature  a  doctri 
naire.  Even  slavery,  the  sociologist  makes  clear, 
has  not  been  everywhere  and  at  all  times  an  evil,  and 
certainly  in  the  United  States  in  the  fifties  it  was 
not  everywhere  so  black  as  Sumner  painted  it. 
Nevertheless,  the  institution  was  utterly  out  of  ac 
cord  with  the  spirit  of  the  Republic  and  with  the 
nineteenth  century,  and  had  become  so  fruitful  of 
moral,  economic  and  political  abuses  that  the  time 
was  more  than  ripe  for  its  being  swept  away.  The 
issue  had  become  primarily  one  of  morals,  and  Sum- 
uer's  mind  and  heart  admirably  fitted  him  for  the 
task  of  setting  forth  the  enormity  of  African  slavery 
in  America  and  of  marshaling  the  North  to  resist 
its  aggressions.  Again,  in  the  first  years  of  the 
war,  no  one  foresaw  more  clearly  that  emancipation 
was  inevitable,  and  no  other  man  did  so  effective 
work  in  preparing  the  public  mind  to  accept  and 
support  that  great  act  of  justice.  These  were  tasks 
congenial  to  an  idealist,  to  a  prophet. 
But  the  problems  which  presented  themselves  at 


SUMMER'S  LEADERSHIP  441 

the  end  of  the  war  were  by  no  means  simple  moral 
issues,  to  be  settled  once  and  for  all  for  the  country 
by  an  idealist's  appeal  to  his  enlightened  conscience. 
The  reconstruction  of  a  disordered  commonwealth 
so  that  it  may  best  accomplish  the  work  of  justice 
calls  for  talents  of  a  different  order  from  those 
needed  for  the  destruction  of  an  abuse.  §umner 
had  entered  political  life  at  the  top,  uudiscipTrrre"<i 
by  the  struggles  through  which  alone  most  men 
reach  that  eminence.  He  had  had  singularly  little 
experience  in  the  adaptation  of  legislation  to  con 
structive  ends  and  none  at  all  in  the  practical  work 
of  carrying  laws  into  effect  in  government.  Yet  the 
war  was  hardly  a  year  old  when  Sumner  began  to 
ponder  over  the  status  of  the  seceded  states  and  the 
problem  of  their  future.  Forthwith  he  propounded 
his  celebrated  theory  that  these  states  had  commit 
ted  suicide,  and  that  upon  the  page  wiped  clean  by 
their  act  of  self-effacement  Congress  might  write 
whatever  it  pleased  as  conditions  precedent  to  the 
reiucorporation  of  those  communities  in  the  Union. 
Sumuer  was  not  held  in  high  regard  by  his  associates 
in  the  Senate  as  an  expounder  of  the  Constitution,1 


1  With  keen  insight  George  William  Curtis  has  pointed  out 
that  Sumner's  attitude  toward  the  Constitution  in  the  days  of 
the  anti-slavery  struggle  had  met  a  need  of  the  times  :  "  He 
sometimes  adopted  propositions  of  constitutional  or  international 
law  which  led  straight  to  his  moral  end,  hut  which  would  hardly 
have  endured  the  legal  microscope.  Yet  he  maintained  them 
with  such  fervor  of  conviction,  such  an  array  of  precedent,  such 
amplitude  of  illustration,  that  to  the  great  popular  mind,  mor 
ally  exalted  like  his  own,  his  statements  had  the  majesty  and 
conclusiveness  of  demonstrations." 


442  CHARLES  SUMNER 

and  this  thesis  commanded  little  attention  at  the 
time  when  it  was  first  enunciated.  Its  logical  in 
consistencies  were  not  far  to  seek,  while  the  impolicy 
of  adopting  any  such  basis  for  reconstruction  should 
have  been  apparent  to  a  man  who  insisted  as  Suin- 
ner  did — for  Dominicans — that  government  must 
be  by  consent  of  the  governed.  The  Supreme  Court 
later  repudiated  this  state-suicide  theory.  Why, 
then,  did  Congress  come  to  accept  it  as  a  basis  for 
action  ?  Not  because  it  was  converted  by  Sumner's 
faulty  logic  or  forceful  eloquence,  but  because  it 
was  confronted  by  a  most  tangled  political  condition. 
If  Lincoln  had  lived  to  deal  tactfully  with  a  Con 
gress  whose  confidence  he  possessed,  to  guide  the 
freedmen  who  idolized  him  and  would  have  heeded 
his  counsel,  and  to  conciliate  the  best  public  senti 
ment  among  Southerners  who  were  already  coming 
to  rely  upon  his  justice,  even  then  the  problems  of 
reconstruction  must  still  have  involved  struggle  and 
controversy ;  but  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  believe 
that  their  solution  would  have  proved  far  more 
simple  and  enduring.  If  the  Eepublican  conveii- 

"  And  this,  again,  was  what  the  time  needed.  The  debate  was 
essentially,  although  under  the  forms  of  law,  revolutionary.  It 
aimed  at  the  displacement  not  only  of  an  administration,  but  of 
a  theory  of  the  government,  and  of  traditional  usage  that  did 
not  mean  to  yield  without  a  struggle.  It  required,  therefore, 
not  the  judicially  logical  mind,  nor  the  fine  touch  of  casuistry 
that  splits,  and  halts,  and  defers  until  the  cause  is  lost,  but  the 
mind  so  absolutely  alive  with  the  idea  and  fixed  upon  the  end 
that  it  compels  the  means.  John  Pym  was  resolved  that  Straf- 
ford  should  be  impeached,  and  he  found  the  law  for  it.  Charles 
Sumner  was  resolved  that  slavery  should  fall,  and  he  found  the 
Constitution  for  it." — Eulogy  on  Sumner,  p.  154. 


SUMNEE'S  LEADEESHIP  443 

tion  of  1864  had  appreciated — what  party  leaders 
have  not  even  yet  learned  from  bitter  experience — 
that  not  only  patriotism  but  shrewd  politics  as  well 
demand  the  selection  of  a  candidate  for  Vice- Presi 
dent  who  in  character  and  in  executive  efficiency  is 
qualified  for  the  presidential  chair,  Lincoln's  la 
mented  death  would  not  have  brought  further  dis 
aster  in  the  succession  of  a  Johnson,  with  his  genius 
for  provoking  dissension.  Sumner  in  the  Senate 
was  intent  upon  protecting  the  colored  race  in  its 
newly-gained  freedom  ;  Stevens  in  the  House  was 
resolved  that  the  threatened  defeat  of  the  Eepubli- 
cau  party  by  Southern  Democrats  lately  in  rebellion 
should  not  be  accomplished.  And  so  these  two  men, 
antipathetic  in  almost  everything  but  their  hatred 
for  slavery  and  all  its  works,  found  in  the  state- 
suicide  theory  a  common  basis  for  action  and  th< 
logic  of  events  presently  brought  Congress  to  follow^ 
in  the  way  they  were  leading. 

Negro  suffrage  was  the  other  feature  of  recon 
struction  for  which  Suinner  more  than  any  other 
one  man  must  bear  the  praise  or  blame.  Almost 
alone  in  the  Senate,  in  season  and  out  of  season,  he 
urged  that  no  distinction  of  race  or  of  color  must 
be  drawn  at  the  polls.  And  again,  at  last,  the 
idealist  and  the  politician  found  common  standing 
ground.  Sumner,  a  devotee  of  the  doctrine  of  civil 
equality,  insisted  that  there  was  need  of  the  negroes' 
ballots  as  of  their  muskets  for  the  protection  of 
their  newly  gained  rights.  Stevens  boasted  that  the 
vote  of  every  enfranchised  black  could  be  relied 


444  CHAELES  SUMNEB 

upon  to  uphold  the  meuaced  rule  of  the  Kepublican 
party.  Doubtless  the  belief  was  widely  held  that 
the  maintenance  of  that  party  in  power,  even  by 
such  means,  was  essential,  if  the  results  of  the 
war  were  to  be  assured.  Nevertheless,  it  was 
the  politician's  arguments  which  brought  Con 
gress  to  adopt  the  policy  that  was  treated  with 
derision  when  first  urged  upon  the  Senate  by  the 
idealist. 

In  the  days  before  Sumner  came  to  consider  him 
self  the  Moses  of  the  negro  race,  he  had  seen  suffrage 
problems  in  a  different  light.  In  1843  he  declared  : 
* i  Our  institutions,  more  than  those  of  any  other 
land,  stand  on  intelligence.  I  believe  in  the  capacity 
of  the  people  to  govern  themselves,  but  only  when 
disciplined  by  education  and  elevated  by  moral 
truth."1  A  few  years  later,  he  raised  with  his 
brother  the  question  :  "May  not  France  set  the  ex 
ample  of  founding  her  republic  on  intelligence,  by 
requiring  that  every  voter  shall  read  and  write!  "  2 
No  man  in  Congress  had  a  higher  regard  for  the 
teachings  of  science  than  Sumner.  Among  his  dear 
est  friends  was  a  scientist  of  the  first  rank  who  had 
devoted  much  careful  study  to  race  problems,  and 
whose  sage  conclusions  as  to  the  future  of  the  negro 
in  America  could  not  have  failed  to  impress  Sum 
ner,  had  he  faced  the  question  free  from  the  preju 
dices  developed  by  years  of  controversy.  As  early 

1  Letter  to  Charlemagne  Tower,  Sept.  18.  Pierce,  Vol.  II,  p. 
272. 

2April  4,  1848.     Pierce,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  37. 


SUMNEK'S  LEADEESHIP  445 

as  1863,  Louis  Agassiz  had  written  to  Dr.  Howe : 
"We  should  beware  how  we  give  to  the  blacks 
rights,  by  virtue  of  which  they  may  endanger  the 
progress  of  the  whites  before  their  temper  has  been 
tested  by  a  prolonged  experience."  He  emphasized 
the  characteristics  which  ancient  monuments  proved 
had  been  from  the  dawn  of  history  possessed  by  the 
negro  race,  and  showed  that  while  other  races  had 
founded  empires  and  attained  a  high  degree  of  civi 
lization,  "the  negro  race  groped  in  barbarism  and 
tiever  originated  a  regular  organization  among  them 
selves."  He  therefore  concludes:  "I  am  not  pre 
pared  to  state  what  political  privileges  they  are  fit 
to  enjoy  now  ;  though  I  have  no  hesitation  in  say 
ing  that  they  should  be  equal  to  other  men  before 
the  law.  The  right  of  owning  property,  of  bearing 
witness,  of  entering  into  contracts,  of  buying  and 
selling,  of  choosing  their  own  domicile,  would  give 
them  ample  opportunity  of  showing  in  a  compara 
tively  short  time  what  political  rights  might  prop 
erly  and  safely  be  granted  to  them  in  successive  in 
stalments.  No  man  has  a  right  to  what  he  is  unfit 
to  use.  Our  own  best  rights  have  been  acquired 
successively.  I  cannot,  therefore,  think  it  just  or 
safe  to  grant  at  once  to  the  negro  all  the  privileges 
which  we  ourselves  have  acquired  by  long  struggles. 
History  teaches  us  what  terrible  reactions  have 
followed  too  extensive  and  too  rapid  changes. 
Let  us  beware  of  granting  too  much  to  the 
negro  race  in  the  beginning  lest  it  become  neces 
sary  hereafter  to  deprive  them  of  some  of  the  priv- 


446  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

i leges  which  they  may  use  to  their  own  and  our  det 
riment."  l 

But  at  the  time  when  the  problem  of  reconstruc 
tion  had  to  be  faced,  Surnner  had  been  denouncing 
slavery  from  the  platform  and  in  the  Senate  for 
twenty  years.  The  term  " slave-monger"  had  been 
so  habitually  upon  his  tongue  that  it  had  come  in 
his  thought  to  cover  almost  all  Southern  whites  who 
had  not  at  peril  of  their  lives  opposed  secession. 
And  so  all  the  teachings  of  sociology  as  to  the  slow 
development  of  capacity  for  self-government  he  be 
lieved  outweighed  by  the  need  of  protecting  the 
freednieu  from  falling  under  the  rule  of  i  i  slave- 
mongers."  As  early  as  1866  he  was  insisting  that 
the  freedmen  must  have  the  ballot  "  (1)  for  his  own 
protection  ;  (2)  for  the  protection  of  the  white 
Unionist ;  and  (3)  for  the  peace  of  the  country." 
Alas  for  the  schemes  of  idealist  and  politician  ! 
Neither  Sunmer  nor  Stevens  had  many  months  to 
live,  but  the  grave  had  not  closed  upon  either  of 
them  before  it  became  evident  that  in  the  ballot  was 
to  be  found  protection  neither  for  the  freedrnan  nor 
for  the  white  Unionist,  while  to  the  peace  of  the 
country  hardly  anything  could  have  been  more 
destructive.  The  orgy  of  misrule  under  ignorant 

lLife  and  Correspondence  of  Louis  Agassiz,  Vol.  II,  p.  605. 
Quoted  by  Rhodes,  Vol.  VI,  pp.  37-38,  who  also  quotes  Col.  T. 
\V.  Higginson  as  saying  that  when  Agassiz  heard  from  him  how 
admirably  the  negro  soldiers  had  behaved  both  in  camp  and  un 
der  fire,  he  said  :  "Then  they  must  vote  of  course.  The  man 
who  risks  his  life  for  his  country  has  the  ngbt  to  vote  in  it. 
There  is  no  question  about  that." 


SUMNER'8  LEADERSHIP  447 

blacks  manipulated  by  unprincipled  whites  led  the 
natural  leaders  of  the  South  in  self-defense  to  unite 
in  a  determined  effort  to  put  an  end  to  such  an  in 
tolerable  state  of  government.1  Unrestricted  negro 
suffrage,  imposed  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the 
Republican  party  at  a  critical  juncture,  did  more 
than  anything  else  to  create  the  "  Solid  South," 
and  to  make  any  normal  party  development  in  that 
section  impossible.  Intelligent  leaders  of  the  negro 
race  unhesitatingly  declare  that  the  indiscriminate 
gift  of  the  ballot  to  the  freedman  was  not  even  a 
doubtful  boon  ;  they  frankly  avow  that  it  distracted 
him  from  the  normal  line  of  development,  and  that 
his  best  interests  would  have  been  subserved  by  the 
imposition  of  fair  educational  or  even  property 
tests,  which  would  have  made  the  franchise  the  re 
ward  of  striving.  But,  as  Agassiz  feared,  the 
ballot,  thus  hastily  given,  was  soon  practically 
taken  away  by  force,  intimidation  or  fraud.  In 
more  recent  years  constitutional  amendments  have 

1  Experience  soon  proved  that  Governor  Andrew  had  a  far 
clearer  insight  into  the  problem  of  reconstruction  than  the  men 
who  determined  its  solution  in  Congress.  "  I  am  confident 
we  cannot  reorganize  political  society  with  any  security  : 
1.  Unless  we  let  in  the  people  to  a  cooperation  and  not  merely 
an  arbitrarily  selected  portion  of  them.  2.  Unless  we  give 
those  who  are,  by  their  intelligence  and  character,  the  natural 
leaders  of  the  people,  and  who  surely  will  lead  them  by  and 
by,  an  opportunity  to  lead  them  now."  Valedictory  address 
to  the  Massachusetts  legislature,  Jan.  4,  1866.  Chandler's 
Memoir  of  Andreic,  p.  251  et  seq-  Pearson's  Life  of  Andrew, 
Vol.  II,  p.  276.  Rhodes  gives  unstinted  praise  to  Andrew's 
clear  thought  and  magnanimous  proposals,  and  thinks  that  his 
idea  might  have  been  realized,  had  it  not  been  for  the  quarrel 
between  the  President  and  Congress.  Vol.  V,  p.  607. 


448  CHAELES  SUMNEE 

been  generally  adopted  in  the  South,  which,  while 
undoubtedly  working  injustice  to  many  negroes  at 
the  time  of  their  adoption,  give  promise  of  more 
substantial  justice  in  the  future.  The  tacit  acquies 
cence  on  the  part  of  the  country  at  large  in  this  an 
nulment  of  "  equal  suffrage"  even  by  such  crude 
and  unfair  devices  as  the  "  grandfather  clauses"  is 
significant  of  a  vast  change  in  public  sentiment  as  to 
one  of  the  cardinal  features  of  the  reconstruction 
policy  which  Sumner  and  Stevens  brought  Congress 
to  adopt.  At  a  conference  upon  education  in  the 
South  in  1908,  one  of  the  most  eminent  educators  in 
the  country,  himself  a  native  of  one  of  the  border 
states,  could  command  unhesitating  assent  in  de 
claring  :  "  We  all  realize,  whether  we  live  north  or 
south  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  line,  that  the  law  which 
placed  the  unlimited  franchise  in  the  hands  of  the 
negro  was  one  of  the  greatest  political  blunders  of 
our  history."  l 

In  dealing  with  the  status  of  the  seceded  states 
and  with  the  political  rights  of  the  negro,  Surnner 
appears  as  an  unpractical  theorist,  not  free  from 
prejudice.  But  his  stand  in  these  controversies  of 
the  closing  years  of  his  life  should  not  be  allowed  to 
hide  the  real  breadth  and  magnanimity  of  the  man 
and  the  greatness  of  his  service.  Nor  was  Sumner 
so  unpractical — in  the  narrow  sense  of  the  term — as 
is  often  implied.  He  was  diligent  in  investigating 
important  measures  which  did  not  fall  within  the 
range  of  his  chief  interest,  and  became  a  clear- 
1  Dr.  Henry  S.  Pritchett,  at  Memphis,  Liay  2,  1908. 


BUHNER'S  LEADERSHIP  449 

headed  and  effective  debater  upon  such  practical 
questions  as  the  tariff,  the  currency,  postal  regula 
tions,  and  copyright.  He  was  attentive  to  the 
wants  of  his  constituents  and  efficient  in  his  corn- 
inittee  work.  He  would  have  proved  a  highly 
serviceable  senator  in  ordinary  times,  though  it  is 
doubtful  whether  a  man  of  his  type  could  have  been 
elected  to  the  Senate  or  would  have  accepted  an 
election  to  the  Senate,  except  in  such  a  crisis  as  that 
of  1850.  Then  the  call  was  for  the  prophet. 

For  Sumner's  great  work  was  not  the  framing  of 
laws  ;  it  was  rather  the  kindling  of  moral  enthusi 
asm,  the  inspiring  of  courage  and  hope,  the  assail 
ing  of  public  injustice.  Sumner  was  emphatically 
"  a  pioneer  of  agitation."  His  "  True  Grandeur  of 
Nations, "  which  first  brought  him  fame  threescore 
years  ago,  is  still  a  grand  arsenal  of  weapons  against 
war.  Even  at  that  early  day  he  showed  himself  an 
earnest  and  far-sighted  leader  in  the  movement  for 
international  arbitration.  His  was  the  first  clear 
programme  proposed  in  Congress  for  the  reform  of 
the  civil  service.  It  was  his  timely  and  much- 
needed  protest  that  checked  illegal  measures  and 
ill-advised  projects  aiming  at  tropical  expansion. 
It  was  his  dauntless  courage  in  denouncing  com 
promise,  in  demanding  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law,  and  in  insisting  upon  emancipation  that 
made  him  the  chief  initiating  force  in  the  struggle 
that  put  an  end  to  slavery.  It  was  he  who  urged 
the  arming  of  the  blacks.  It  was  his  courage  and 
magnanimity  that  put  a  check  upon  barbarous  at- 


450  CHARLES  SUMNER 

tempts  at  retaliation,  whether  in  the  treatment  of 
Confederate  prisoners,  in  the  grant  of  letters  of 
marque  and  reprisal,  or  in  the  seizure  of  unoffend 
ing  citizens  of  foreign  countries  in  return  for  wrongs 
inflicted  upon  Americans  abroad.  Finally,  through 
out  the  greatest  crisis  of  our  national  history,  it  was 
the  influence  of  Charles  Sumner  more  than  of  any 
other  one  man  that  kept  this  country  out  of  war 
with  England  and  with  France,  when  war  with 
either  of  them  would  have  meant  the  overthrow  of 
the  Union.  If  these  be  not  the  works  of  practical 
statesmanship,  where  shall  such  be  found  ? 

But  through  all  his  public  life  he  served  not  so 
much  by  what  he  said  or  did  as  by  what  he  was. 
He  could  truly  say  of  himself:  "The  slave  of 
principles,  I  call  no  party  master."  His  power  lay 
in  his  insight  into  moral  forces  and  his  ability  to 
convert  to  his  opinion  the  great  public,  by  whose 
pressure  his  colleagues  were  often  reluctantly  brought 
to  follow  his  standard.  For  the  arts  of  the  ordinary 
party  manager  he  had  no  aptitude  and  little  regard. 
Not  once  but  many  times  he  boldly  forced  issues 
which  filled  the  party  leaders  with  dismay  and 
threatened  to  disrupt  the  anti-slavery  forces. 
Nevertheless,  as  Curtis  said,  "  the  rank  and  file  of 
the  party,  to  borrow  a  military  phrase,  dressed 
upon  Sumner,"  and  in  the  later  years,  when  dis 
sensions  had  arisen  and  he  took  a  course  which  most 
of  his  former  comrades  would  not  approve,  u  there 
were  thousands  and  thousands  of  men  who  would  be 
startled  and  confused  to  find  themselves  marching 


SUMNEE'S  LEADERSHIP  461 

in  a  political  campaign  out  of  step  with  Charles 
Sumner."  1 

Sumner 's  service  has  been  well  appraised  by  the 
man  upon  whom  rather  than  upon  any  other  his 
mantle  fell.  George  Frisbie  Hoar,  another  great 
senator  from  Massachusetts,  said  of  him  : 

"  Charles  Sumner  held  a  place  in  the  public  life 
of  the  country  which  no  other  man  ever  shared 
with  him.  ...  He  was  an  idealist.  He  sub 
jected  every  measure  to  the  inexorable  test  of  the 
moral  law.  Yet,  at  the  same  time,  he  was  a  power 
ful  political  leader,  and  in  a  time  when  the  fate  of 
the  Republic  was  decided  accomplished  vast  practi 
cal  results.  Where  duty  seemed  to  him  to  utter  its, 
high  commands,  he  could  see  no  obstacle  in  hostile  j 
majorities  and  no  restraint  in  the  lines  of  a  written  I 
Constitution.  It  is  right,  therefore  constitutional, 
was  the  logical  formula  with  which  he  dealt  with 
every  question  of  state.  We  should  be  deaf  and 
blind  to  all  the  lessons  of  history,  if  we  were  to  de 
clare  it  to  be  safe  that  men  trusted  with  executive  or 
even  legislative  power  should  act  on  that  principle. 
Unfortunately,  humanity  is  so  constituted  that  the 
benevolent  despot  is  likely  to  do  more  mischief 
even  than  a  malevolent  despot.  His  example  of 
absolute  disregard  of  constitutional  restraints  will 
be  followed  by  men  of  very  different  motives.  Yet 
the  influence  of  one  such  man  pressing  and  urging 
his  companions  forward  in  a  legislative  body  like 
the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  keeping  ever  before 
the  people  the  highest  ideals,  inspired  by  love  of 
liberty,  and  ever  speaking  and  working  in  the  fear 
of  God,  is  inestimable."  2 

1  Orations,  Vol.  TIT,  pp.  231-232. 

*  Autobiography  of  Seventy  Years,  Vol.  I,  p.  214. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

BARTOL,  C.  A.  Senatorial  Character  :  a  Sermon  in  West  Church, 
Boston,  after  the  Decease  of  Charles  Sumner,  1874. 

BOLTON,  MRS.  S.  E.  Charles  Sumner.  (In  her  "Famous  Amer 
ican  Statesmen.")  1888. 

BOSTON,  MASS.     City  Council  Memorial  of  Sumner,  1874. 

CHAMBERLAIN,  D.  H.  Charles  Sumner  and  the  Treaty  of  Wash 
ington,  1902. 

CHAMBRUN,  MARQUIS  DE.  Personal  Recollections  of  Charles 
Sumner.  ScribneSs  Magazine,  February,  1893,  P-  I53- 

CHAPLIN,  J.  and  MRS.  J.  (Dunbar.)  Life  of  Charles  Sumner. 
Introduction  by  W.  Claflin,  1874. 

CLARKE,  J.  F.  Charles  Sumner.  (In  his  "Memorial  and  Bi 
ographical  Sketches.")  1878. 

CURTIS,  G.  W.  Charles  Sumner :  a  Eulogy.  Orations  and  Ad 
dresses,  1894.  Vol.  III.  Same,  in  Massachusetts  General 
Court  Memorial. 

DAVIS,  J.  C.  B.  Mr.  Sumner,  the  Alabama  Claims  and  their  Set 
tlement.  (Letter  to  N.  Y.  Herald.}  1878. 

DAWES,  ANNA  L.     Charles  Sumner.     New  York,  1892. 

ELLIOTT,  R.  B.  Oration  delivered  April  14,  1874.  In  Massachu 
setts  General  Court  Memorial. 

GRIMKE,  A.  H.  Life  of  Charles  Sumner,  the  Scholar  in  Politics, 
1892. 

HARRIS,  A.  B.  Charles  Sumner's  Autographs.  N.  Y.  Evening 
Post,  July  17,  1875. 

Charles  Sumner's  Library.     N.  Y.  Evening-  Post,  June  II, 

1875. 

The  Sumner  Missals.     N.  Y.  Evening  Post,  January  22, 

1876. 

HIGGINSON,  T.  W.     Contemporaries,  1899. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  453 

HOAR,  G.  F.  Sumner.  North  American  Review^  1878.  Vol, 
CXXVI,  p.  i. 

Sumner.     Forum.     Vol.  XVI,  p.  549. 

JOHNSON,  A.  B.  Cosmopolitan  Magazine,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  406;  Vol. 
IV,  pp.  40,  142. 

Recollections   of  Charles    Sumner.     Scribner's   Monthly^, 

August-October,  1887.     Vol.  VIII,  pp.  475-490 ;  Vol.  IX, 
pp.  101-114;  Vol.  X,  pp.  224-229,  297-304. 

LESTER,  C.  E.     Life  and  Public  Services  of  Charles  Sumner,  1874. 
MAGOUN,  G.  F.     Charles  Sumner.     (In  his  "Atlas  Essays.")     1877. 

MASSACHUSETTS  GENERAL  COURT.  A  Memorial  of  Charles  Sum 
ner.  (Including  Commemorative  Observances,  June  9, 
1874;  Poem  by  J.  G.  Whittier;  Eulogy  by  G.  W.  Curtis  ; 
Eulogy  by  Carl  Schurz,  April  29,  1874;  Oration  by  R.  B. 
Elliott,  April  14,  1874;  Sermon  by  H.  W.  Foote,  March  22, 
1874.) 

NASON,  ELIAS.     The  Life  and  Times  of  Charles  Sumner,  1874. 

PIERCE,  EDWARD  L.  Memoir  and  Letters  of  Charles  Sumner. 
Four  volumes,  1877-1893. 

The   Completion  of  the  Sumner  Memoir.     (In  his  "  En 
franchisement  and  Citizenship.")     1896. 

SCHURZ,  CARL.  Sumner.  Eulogy  delivered  before  the  City  Gov 
ernment  of  Boston,  April  29,  1874.  Massachusetts  General 
Court  Memorial. 

STEARNS,  F.  P.     Cambridge  Sketches,  1905. 

STOREY,  MOORFIELD.  Charles  Sumner.  (American  Statesman 
Series.)  1900. 

SUMNER,  CHARLES.     Works.     Fifteen  volumes,  1870-1883. 

U.  S.  CONGRESS.  Memorial  Addresses  on  the  Life  and  Character 
of  Charles  Sumner,  April  27,  1874. 

WHIPPLE,  E.  P.  Recollections  of  Charles  Sumner.  (In  his 
"  Recollections  of  Eminent  Men.")  1887. 

WRIGHT,  J.  J.  In  Memoriam  :  Charles  Sumner.  Eulogies  deliv 
ered  by  J.  J.  Wright,  R.  B.  Elliott,  and  T.  II.  Jackson, 
March  17,  1874,  in  Columbia,  S.  C. 


INDEX 


ABOLITIONISTS,  Sumner's  atti 
tude  toward,  103. 

Adams,  Charles  Francis,  editor 
of  Daily  Whig,  104;  opposes 
coalition,  116,  125;  on  Sum 
ner's  candidacy  for  Senate, 
129;  opposes  revised  consti 
tution,  164;  on  Know-Noth 
ings,  182;  inclined  toward 
compromise,  240 ;  on  Sum 
ner's  "  national  claims,"  340, 
378,  n.  I. 

Adams,  Charles  Francis,  Jr., 
134,  341,  n.;  363,  n.  3;  371, 
n.  I. 

Adams,  John  Q.,  commends 
Sumner's  words  on  slavery 
and  war,  95  ;  on  emancipa 
tion,  249;  no,  113,  119. 

Adams,  Samuel,  Sumner  com 
pared  with,  439,  n.  2. 

"  Admiralty  Practice,"  Dun- 
lap's,  Sumner  edits,  43. 

Agassiz,  Louis,  declines  position 
on  San  Domingo  Commis 
sion,  361,  n.  I  ;  opinion  as  to 
negro  suffrage,  445. 

Alabama  and  the  Alabama 
claims,  273,  338. 

Alaska,  Sumner's  part  in  the 
accession  of,  318-319;  com 
pared  in  value  with  San  Do 
mingo,  373,  n.  i. 

Allen,  Charles,  leader  of  Young 
Whigs,  no;  at  Philadelphia 
convention,  116. 

Allston,  Washington,  64,  94. 

American  Antiquarian  Society, 


Sumner  elected  a  member  of, 

72-. 

American  Jurist,  Sumner  con 
tributor  to,  37,  42  ;  editor  of, 

43- 

Amnesty  Bill,  412,  413. 

Andrew,  John  A.,  41,  182,  184; 
views  on  negro  suffrage  and 
reconstruction,  447,  n.  I. 

Annexation  of  territory,  Sum 
ner's  attitude  toward,  Alaska, 
318-319;  St.  Thomas,  319; 
Canada,  363-364.  See  San 
Domingo. 

Appleton,  Nathan,  on  nomina 
tion  of  Taylor,  117,  n.  I. 

Arbitration,  Sumner's  early  ad 
vocacy  of  international,  95- 
96. 

Argyll,  Duke  and  Duchess  of, 
230,  271,  292. 

Arkansas,  reconstruction  begun 
in,  284 ;  opposition  to  recog 
nition  of,  286. 

Art,  Sumner's  interest  in,  50 ; 
collections  of,  404;  appre 
ciation  of,  407-408. 

Atchison,  David  R.,  leader  of 
"  border  ruffians,"  189,  194. 

Atkinson,  Edward,  331,  n.  I. 

Autographs,  Sumner's  collec 
tion  of,  404. 


BABCOCK,  O.  E.,  negotiates 
"  protocol "  with  San  Do 
mingo,  34" ;  concludes  treaty, 
344,  348.  * 


INDEX 


465 


Badger,  G.  E.,  abuse  of  Sum- 
ner,  156. 

Balch,  F.  V.,  393,  399. 

Ballot,  secret,  in  Massachusetts 
legislature,  133-134- 

Baltimore,  Sumner  hunted  by 
mob  in,  245. 

Bancroft,  Frederic,  Life  of 
Seward,  138,  n.  I,  passim. 

Bancroft,  George,  64 ;  Sumner 
criticizes  eulogy  of  Lincoln, 
89,  n.  i  ;  author  of  Johnson's 
first  message,  302;  corre 
spondence  with  Sumner  con 
cerning  Hawthorne's  appoint 
ment,  400-402. 

Banks,  N.  P.,  130;  elected 
speaker,  188;  284,  431,  n.  I. 

Battle-Flag  Resolution,  262, 
423 ;  censure  by  Massachu 
setts  legislature,  424 ;  effort 
to  rescind,  424-425  ;  re 
scinded,  431-432  ;  Lamaron, 

437- 

Benton,  Thomas  H.,  pessimistic 
as  to  politics  in  1850,  139. 

Bird,  F.  W.,  331,  n.  I;  371, 
n.  i. 

Elaine,  James  G.,  on  Sumner's 
removal  from  chairmanship, 
366,  n.  I. 

Blair,  Montgomery,  on  Trent 
Affair,  252. 

Boston,  in  Sumner's  boyhood, 
22  ;  press  comments  on  Sum 
ner's  election,  135,  n.  2;  179, 
250 ;  City  Council  endorses 
Crittenden  Compromise,  242- 

243- 

Boutwell,  George  S.,  elected 
governor  of  Massachusetts, 
130  ;  on  negro  suffrage,  298  ; 
presents  rescinding  resolu 
tion,  432  ;  336,  358,  n.  I  ; 
414,  n.  I  ;  439,  n.  2. 


Bright,  Jesse  D.,  on  exclusion 
of  Sumner  from  committees, 
165  ;  reports  committee  list, 
244 ;  Sumner's  speech  for 
expulsion  of,  387. 

Bright,  John,  on  Trent  Af 
fair,  254,  271  ;  on  Sumner's 
"  national  claims,"  340;  221, 
222,  422. 

Brook  Farm,  Sumner's  attitude 
toward,  75. 

Brooks,  Preston  S.,  202 ;  as 
saults  Sumner,  204  ;  debate 
over,  205-209  ;  trial  of,  210; 
resignation,  21 1;  reelection, 
212,  and  n.  i  ;  Southern 
sentiment  toward,  212;  North 
ern  feeling,  213;  death  of, 
219;  Sumner's  feeling  to 
ward,  220. 

Brougham,  Lord,  54  ;  approves 
Sumner's  attitude  on  bound 
ary  controversy,  59  ;  221. 

Brown,  John,  217,  n.  2. 

Brown-Sequard,  Dr.  C.  E.,  on 
Sumner's  case,  224 ;  applies 
moxa,  225. 

Burns,  Anthony,  attempted  res 
cue  of,  173-174. 

Butler,  A.  P.,  140,  171  ;  abuse 
of  Sumner,  183 ;  Sumner 
rebukes,  195-197  ;  connec 
tion  with  Brooks,  and  the 
assault,  202,  208  ;  219. 

Butler,  B.  F.,  Sumner  opposes 
nomination  of,  383. 


CALHOUN,  JOHN  C.,  Sumner's 
impression  of,  40  ;  139. 

Cameron,  Simon,  366,  367,  n.  2. 

Canada,  proposed  annexation 
of,  341-342  ;  opposed  by  Ca 
nadians,  355 ;  Sumner  favors 
annexation  of,  363. 


456 


INDEX 


Capitol,  paintings  in,  262; 
sculpture  for,  407,  n.  I. 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  54. 

Cass,  Lewis,  minister  to  France, 
58 ;  presents  Sumner  in  Sen 
ate,  138 ;  209. 

Cavour,  Sumner's  meeting,  228. 

Centralization,  Sumner  indiffer 
ent  as  to,  320. 

Chamberlain,  D.  H.,  on  Sum 
ner's  removal  from  chairman 
ship,  371,  n.  i. 

Channing,  W.  E.,  influence  on 
Sumner,  43,  399  ;  Sumner's 
"  idol,"  65 ;  with  Sumner 
condemns  Webster's  Creole 
letter,  102. 

Chase,  Salmon  P.,  congratulates 
Sumner  on  election,  135,  n. 
2  ;  on  compact  theory  of  gov 
ernment,  157  ;  issues  "  Ap 
peal  of  Independent  Demo 
crats,"  167  ;  urged  by  Sum 
ner  for  Chief- Justiceship,  281 ; 

J39»  !53»  n-  I J  !58»  l6S. 
177,  183,243,  266,  268;  295. 

Chestnut,  James,  abuse  of  Sum 
ner,  235. 

Chinese,  Sumner's  attitude  to 
ward,  381. 

Cincinnati,  Society  of,  Sumner 
member  of,  72. 

Civil  Rights  Bill,  412,  422, 
428,  429,  and  n.  I  ;  433. 

Civil  Service,  Sumner  initiates 
movement  for  reform  of,  244, 
279. 

Clarke,  J.  F.,  217,  n.  2;  425. 

Clay,  Henry,  Sumner's  im 
pression  of,  39 ;  last  day  of, 
in  Senate,  139. 

Clemens,  J.,  abuse  of  Sumner, 
156. 

Clergy,  petition  of  New  Eng 
land,  170,  172. 


Cleveland,  H.  R.,  44,  45- 

Clingman,  T.  L.,  207,  210. 

Coalition  in  Massachusetts,  sug 
gested,  119;  urged  by  Wil 
son,  125  ;  results  in  Sumner's 
election  to  Senate,  126-134. 

Cobden,  Richard,  221 ;  on  Trent 
Affair,  254;  on  blockade, 
271;  255,  n.  i;  338. 

Codification  of  law,  61 ;  of 
United  States  Public  Statutes, 
144,  311. 

Committee  Service,  Sumner's, 
Roads  and  Canals,  140 ;  ex 
cluded  from,  165,  1 88  ;  on 
Territories,  218;  on  Foreign 
Relations,  244 ;  on  Slavery 
and  Freedmen,  276  ;  on  Dis 
trict  of  Columbia,  308,  422. 
See  Foreign  Relations. 

Compromise  of  1850,  121  ; 
Sumner  attacks  finality  of, 

149,  159. 

Confiscation,  estates  of  Confed 
erates,  267. 

"  Congress  of  the  Nations," 
Sumner  advocates,  95. 

Conkling,  Roscoe,  365. 

Conscience,  public,  need  of 
support  of,  for  laws,  154. 

"  Conscience  Whigs,"  99,  109. 

Constitution  (Massachusetts), 
revised,  161  ;  defeated,  163. 

Constitution  (United  States), 
Sumner's  attitude  toward, 
IO2,  128,  132;  guarantees  of 
freedom,  150;  Sumner's  in 
terpretation  of,  152,  178,  328, 
381,  441,  n.  i ;  compact 
theory  of,  153,  n.  I  ;  and  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law,  155. 

Cooper    Institute    speech,    236, 

273- 

CopyrigU,  Sumner  favors  inter 
national,  311. 


INDEX 


457 


Crawford,  Thomas,  Sumner's 
friendship  for,  60,  71,  221, 
228. 

Creole  Case,  101-102. 

Crittenden,  J.  J.,  tries  to  shield 
Sumner,  205 ;  compromise 
proposals,  239;  231,  248,  n.  I. 

Cubans,   belligerency  of,   341- 

342- 

Curtis,  George  William,  67,  n. 
I  ;  109,  n.  I  ;  220,  360,  389, 
394,  411,  n.  i;  419,  n.  2; 

435-  45°- 

Gushing,  Caleb,  opposes  Sum 
ner's  election,  131  ;  his 
"  ukase,"  163 ;  favored  by 
Sumner  for  Chief-J  ustice,  430 ; 
345»  405- 


Daily  Whig,  established,  103. 

Dana,  R.  H.,  Jr.,  124,  125,  217. 

Davis,  H.  W.,  268. 

Davis,  Jefferson,  140 ;  on 
Brooks  assault,  213 ;  233,  309. 

Davis,  Mrs.  Jefferson,  impres 
sion  of  Sumner,  385. 

Davis,  John,  on  slavery's  influ 
ence  on  public  life,  139. 

Deadlock  in  Massachusetts 
legislature,  131-134- 

Dewitt,  D.  M.,  "  Impeachment 
and  Trial  of  Andrew  John 
son,"  324,  n.  I. 

Douglas,  Stephen  A.,  upholds 
Fugitive  Slave  Law,  157; 
presents  report  on  Nebraska, 
1 66,  1 68,  169,  171  ;  abuse  of 
Sumner,  191  ;  Sumner  re 
bukes,  195 ;  colloquy  with 
Sumner,  199-200;  on  Brooks 
assault,  205  ;  231,  232,  234. 

Douglass,  F.,  433. 

Drayton  and  Sayres,  pardoned 
at  Sumner's  request,  143. 


Dred  Scott  Decision,  219,  231, 

282. 
Dunning,  W.  A.,  302,  n.  I  and 

2;  358,  n.  I. 

EDMUNDSON,  H.  A.,  203,  204 ; 
censure  of,  recommended, 
207 ;  censure  and  resigna 
tion,  211  ;  reelection,  212. 

Education,  Sumner  cooperates 
with  Mann  for  improvement 
of  public,  75 ;  urges  free 
schools  for  freedmen,  316- 

3!7- 

Eliot,  S.  A.,  98;  succeeds  Win- 
throp  in  Congress,  123;  de 
nounces  Kansas-Nebraska 
Bill,  170. 

Emancipation,  Sumner  urges, 
on  Lincoln,  248,  258-259; 
issue  in  Massachusetts  Re 
publican  Convention,  249 ; 
press  comments  on  proposal, 
250. 

Emerson,  R.  W.,  part  in  or 
ganization  of  Republican 
party  in  Massachusetts,  181 ; 
opinion  of  Sumner,  433. 

Emigrant  Aid  Co.,  189, 191, 192; 
defended  by  Sumner,  194. 

England,  Sumner's  first  visit  to, 

$«• 

Engravings,  Sumner's  interest 
in,  223,  229,  382,  404. 

Equality  of  race,  Charles  Pinck- 
ney  Sumner's  attitude  toward, 
18,  21  ;  Sumner's,  101,  261, 
277,  288,  317,  422. 

Europe,  Sumner's  first  trip  to, 
45-63 ;  last  visit  to,  420-422. 

Everett,  Edward,  election  to 
Senate,  161 ;  opposes  com 
mittee  recognition  of  Sum 
ner,  165;  on  Kansas-Ne 
braska  Bill,  167 ;  presents 


458 


INDEX 


petition  of  New  England 
clergy,  171;  resigns,  172; 
urges  Sumner  to  vote  for 
Crittenden  Compromise,  242. 

FANEUIL  HALL,  banquet  fol 
lowing  Sumner's  oration,  87- 
88. 

Felton,  Charles  C.,  44,  123. 

Fenianism,  320,  363,  and  n.  2 ; 

377- 

Fessenden,  W.  P.,  175  ;  chair 
man  Committee  on  Recon 
struction,  302 ;  rebukes  Sum 
ner,  307 ;  opposes  Alaska 
purchase,  319,  393. 

Fifteenth  Amendment,  328. 

Filibuster,  172,  277,  288. 

Fillmore,  Millard,  condemned 
by  Sumner,  128,  143,  388, 
and  n.  2. 

Fish,  Hamilton,  enters  Senate 
with  Sumner,  142 ;  votes 
against  repeal  of  Fugitive 
Slave  Law,  157,  180,  222, 
331 ;  appointed  Secretary  of 
State,  333-335  5  attitude 
changing  toward  Sumner, 
355,  n.  I ;  on  terms  of  agree 


ment  with  England,  355  ;  in- 

in    Me 
papers,  361. 


suit    to    Sumner 


lotley 


Fish,  Mrs.  Hamilton,  142 ;  ap 
proves  Sumner's  speech,  157. 

"  Five  of  Clubs,"  44,  65. 

Flack,  H.  E.,  308,  n.  I  ;  412, 
n.  I. 

Forbes,  J.  M.,  243,  n.  I ;  255, 
n.  i  ;  opinion  of  Seward,  419, 
n.  2. 

Foreign  Relations,  Committee 
on,  Seward  keeps  Sumner 
off,  218;  Sumner  assigned 
to,  231;  chairman  of, 
244;  holds  up  Retaliation 


Bill,  310;  reorganization  pro 
posed,  358,  360;  Sumner's 
removal  from  chairmanship, 

365-371' 

Fourteenth  Amendment,  de 
bated  in  Senate,  306;  causes 
and  motives  leading  to,  306, 
n.  2;  308;  "an  instalment, 
not  a  finality,"  314;  rejected 
by  Southern  states,  314. 

Fourth  of  July  Oration,  78-89. 

France,  sale  of  arms  to,  413- 
414. 

Freedmen's  Bureau,  277. 

"  Freedom  national,  Slavery 
sectional,"  148-156. 

Free  Soil  Party,  organized  in 
Massachusetts,  Ii6-n8. 

French,  Sumner's  mastery  of, 
46-48. 

French  Spoliation  Claims,  279. 

Fugitive  Slave  Law,  123;  Sum 
ner's  denunciation  of,  1 28  ; 
Sumner  moves  resolution  for 
its  repeal,  146 ;  addresses 
Senate  on,  148-156;  Boston 
petition  for  repeal,  174; 
Sumner  on  enforcement,  177, 
179  ;  votes  on  repeal  of,  179, 
184  ;  repealed,  276-277. 


GAMBETTA,  LEON,  421. 

Garfield,  J.  A.,  favors  negro 
suffrage,  298. 

Garrison,  W.  L.,  censures  Sum 
ner's  delay,  145 ;  on  John 
son's  impeachment,  323,  n.  I ; 
opposes  rescinding  censure  of 
Sumner,  425. 

Georgia,  reconstruction  in,  380. 

Giddings,  J.  R.,  113,  210,  216. 

Gladstone,  W.  E.,  221,  222, 
230,  272,  273. 

Godkin,  E.  L.,  371,  n.  I ;  410. 


INDEX 


459 


"  Grandeur  of  Nations,  The 
True,"  78-89,  246. 

Grant,  Ulysses  S.,  report  on 
Southern  states,  303-304 ; 
nominated  for  President,  329- 
330;  approves  Sumner's  at 
titude  on  Johnson-Clarendon 
Convention,  339;  on  British 
breach  of  neutrality,  341 ; 
desire  to  recognize  Cuban  in 
surgents,  341  ;  calls  on  Sum- 
ner  to  urge  support  of  San 
Domingo  treaties,  349  ;  praise 
of  San  Domingo,  356-357 ; 
attitude  toward  Sumner,  358, 
n.  I ;  denounced  by  Sumner, 
373  ;  candidate  for  reelection, 
414;  "Republicanism  vs. 
Grantism,"  417. 

Greeley,  Horace,  188,  239, 
298;  leader  of  Liberal  Re 
publicans,  415  ;  presidential 
candidate,  419,  n.  2 ;  defeat 
and  death,  422. 

Greene,  G.  W.,  60,  62. 

Greenleaf,  Simon,  professor  in 
law  school,  35. 

Greenough,  H.,  Sumner's  cor 
respondence  with,  407,  and 
n.  I. 

Grey,  Lord  de,  377. 

Grimes,  J.  W.,  266. 

Guizot,  Henri,  221. 

HALE,  EDWARD  EVERETT,  rec 
ollections  of  Sumner,  94. 

Hale,  John  P.,  1 19, 139, 157, 159. 

Harvard  College,  Sumner  stu 
dent  in,  26-28  ;  law  school, 
34-37  5  cost  of,  compared 
with  that  of  Ohio,  83;  Phi 
Beta  Kappa  oration,  93 ; 
Sumner's  bequest  of  peace 
prize  to,  96 ;  other  bequests 
to,  404. 


Hawthorne,  Nathaniel,  64,  228  ; 
Sumner  secures  office  for, 
400-401. 

Ilayti,  Sumner  secures  diplo 
matic  recognition  of,  260 ; 
tribute  to  Sumner,  434;  Sum 
ner  defends  independence  of, 

352- 
Higginson,  Thos.  W.,  tries  to 

free   Burns,    173;    384,   399, 
n.  2. 

Hillard,  George  S.,  forms  law 
partnership  with  Sumner,  41 ; 

44.  98»  l69»  427. 
Hoar,  E.  Rockwood,  332,  359, 
376  ;  at  Sumner's  death-bed, 

432-433- 
Hoar,    George    F.,    116,    117, 

3'7,  359,  392,45i- 

Hoar,  Samuel,  176,  180. 

Homesteads  for  freedmen, 
urged  by  Sumner,  317. 

Hooper,  Samuel,  402,  403. 

Houston,  General  Samuel,  de 
fends  New  England  clergy, 
171. 

Howe,  Julia  Ward,  406 ;  op 
poses  rescinding  of  censure 
on  Sumner,  425. 

Howe,  Samuel  Gridley,  8,  65  ; 
Sumner  meets,  in  nativist 
riot,  71  ;  Sumner's  illness, 
72 ;  interested  with  Sumner 
in  phrenology,  74;  urges 
Sumner  into  Prison  Disci 
pline  controversy,  97;  in, 
124,  138;  criticizes  Sumner's 
speech  on  Kossuth,  143; 
Sumner  urges  appointment  to 
foreign  courts,  245,  337; 
commissioner  to  San  Do 
mingo,  361  ;  favors  annex 
ation  of  San  Domingo,  373, 
n.  I. 

Humboldt,  Alex,  von,  226. 


460 


INDEX 


IMPEACHMENT  of  Johnson, 
Sumner's  language  before, 
313  ;  trial  of,  322-326. 

Irish  in  Massachusetts  politics, 
163,  181. 

Italy,  Sumner's  first  visit  to,  59. 

JACKSON,  ANDREW,  on  slavery 
and  disunion,  242. 

Jacob,  David,  Sr.,  22. 

Jeffrey,  Lord,  55. 

Johnson,  Andrew,  Sumner's 
early  impressions  of,  295 ; 
proposed  qualified  negro  suf 
frage,  300 ;  first  message  of, 
302  ;  vetoes  overridden,  305  ; 
"  swings  'round  the  circle," 
312;  denounced  by  Sumner, 
313;  impeachment  of,  322- 
326. 

Johnson,  Arnold  B.,  8,  217, n.  2. 

Johnson,  Reverdy,  282,  n.  I ; 
negotiates  Johnson-Claren 
don  Convention,  335-336. 

Johnson-Clarendon  Convention, 
336 ;  debated  and  rejected, 

337-338.  345»  377- 
Joint   High    Commission,    365, 

376»  377- 

Jury,  trial  by,  guaranteed  by 
Constitution,  153. 

KANSAS,  civil  war  in,  189-190, 
192 ;  debate  over  admission 
of,  233. 

Kansas-Nebraska  Bill,  de 
nounced  by  Sumner,  168;  by 
Massachusetts  town-meetings, 
170;  a  "swindle,"  194. 

Keitt,  L.  M.,  and  the  Brooks 
assault,  205  ;  censure  recom 
mended  and  passed,  207,  21 1  ; 
reflected,  212;  eulogy  of 
Brooks,  219  ;  death,  220. 


Kemble,  Mrs.  Frances  A.,  64, 

65.  71. 

Kent,  Chancellor,  38-39. 
Know-Nothing  movement,  181- 

183. 
Kossuth,  Sumner   on   welcome 

to,  142. 

LAFAYETTE,   Sumner's  oration 

on,  237. 
Lamar,    L.  Q.    C.,   eulogy  on 

Sumner,  436-437- 
Land-grants   to   Iowa,   favored 

by  Sumner,  143. 
Lawrence,  looting  of,  190 ;  192- 

193- 

Lawyers,  Sumner  on  French, 
50  ;  on  English,  52. 

Law  School,  Harvard,  Sumner 
student  in,  34-37 ;  declines 
instructorship  in,  41  ;  lecturer 
in,  42,  69 ;  Story's  wish  that 
Sumner  succeed  him,  51, 
n.  I ;  Sumner  not  in  favor 
at,  91. 

Lecompton  Constitution,  223. 

Legal  tender  notes,  Sumner  on 
issue  of,  327. 

Lewis,  Sir  George  Cornewall, 
214. 

Liberator,  first  paper  subscribed 
for  by  Sumner,  ioo,  145. 

Liberal  Republicans,  415-417, 
420. 

Lieber,  Francis,  Sumner's  cor 
respondence  with,  43,  68, 
ioo ;  on  Sumner's  resolutions 
on  foreign  intervention,  270. 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  nominated, 
232 ;  Sumner  supports,  237  ; 
on  Republican  party,  243 ; 
on  Trent  Affair,  253-254; 
on  opposition  to  Seward,  266  ; 
renomination  not  favored  by 
Sumnei,  280-281  ;  289;  last 


INDEX 


461 


speech,     293 ;    death,     294 ; 

Sumner's  eulogy  of,  294,  390. 
Lincoln,    Mrs.    Abraham,    289, 

290,  380. 

Lincoln,  Robert  T.,  294. 
Longfellow,  Henry  W.,  44,  45, 

62,  102,  108,  n.  i;   118,  134, 

138,  391- 

Louis  Philippe,  Sumner's  esti 
mate  of,  48-49. 

Louisiana,  reconstruction  be 
gun,  284  ;  debate  over  recog 
nition  of,  287. 

Lowell,  James  Russell,  opinion 
of  Sumner's  oration  on  war, 
87,  n.  I ;  comment  of  John 
son-Clarendon  Convention 
speech,  339,  n.  I ;  358,  n.  I. 

Lyceum,  in  New  England,  92  ; 
color  line  in,  101. 


MACAULAY,  THOMAS  B.,  55. 
Mackenzie,  A.  S.,  Sumner's  de 
fense  of,  73. 
"  Maine      Law,"     complicates 

Massachusetts    politics,    160, 

163. 
Mann,    Horace,  41 ;    Sumner's 

coSperation    with,    75,    126, 

158,  185. 
Marque    and     reprisal,    letters 

of,    Sumner's    opposition   to, 

268. 
Marshall,  Chief- Justice  John,  as 

table  companion,  39. 
Marshfield,   elects    Sumner    to 

constitutional  convention, 

161. 
Mason,    J.    M.,    140;    opposes 

Sumner's  addressing  Senate, 

X47  >   *75  >    Sumner  rebukes, 

177,    198,    200;    seized    on 

Trent  t  251. 
Massachusetts     Historical     So 


ciety,  Sumner's  election  to 
426. 

Memorandum,  Sumner's 
"hemispheric  flag-with 
drawal,"  363,  368. 

Metric  system,  favored  by  Sum 
ner,  311. 

Metternich,  Prince,  comments 
on  America,  61. 

Mexican  War  Bill,  104-107  ; 
Sumner  denounces,  1 12. 

Mexico,  French  intervention  in, 
267. 

Military  governors,  appoint 
ment  of,  284. 

Mississippi,  refuses  to  ratify 
Amendment  XIII,  299. 

Montana,  question  of  admission, 
278. 

Montezuma,  as  ancestor  of 
Americans,  49. 

Morley,  John,  379,  n.  I. 

Morpeth,  Lord,  53. 

Morton,  O.  P.,  359,  361,  364. 

Motley,  John  Lothrop,  228, 
230,  331 ;  appointed  Minister 
to  England,  336 ;  instruc 
tions  to,  344-346 ;  dis 
regard  of  instructions,  347, 
and  n.  I ;  resignation  called 
for,  353  ;  removal  of,  357. 


"  NABOTH'S  VINEYARD,"  360. 

Napoleon  III,  229,  382. 

"Nasby,  Petroleum  V.,"  Sum 
ner's  initiation  by  Lincoln, 
291. 

Nast,  Thomas,  caricatures  of 
Sumner,  389. 

National  claims,  put  forward 
by  Sumner,  338;  urged  by 
Grant,  346. 

Naturalization,  changes  in,  urged 
by  Sumner,  381. 


462 


INDEX 


Nebraska,  report  on,  166  ;  ne 
gro  suffrage  imposed  in,  309. 

Negro  suffrage,  278,  295-296; 
Sumner's  persistent  urging 
of,  298;  in  Fourteenth 
Amendment,  306,  and  n.  2 ; 
308;  in  Colorado  and  Ne 
braska,  308 ;  in  District  of 
Columbia,  313,  and  n.  2 ;  in 
territories,  314;  made  condi 
tion  of  reconstruction,  316; 
Sumner's  championship  of, 
443-448. 

Negroes,  in  Europe,  230;  en 
listment  of,  in  United  States 
army,  267. 

Neutrality,  Sumner  on  British 
breach  of,  271-274,  309-311, 

4I3- 

New  York  Historical  Society, 
72. 

Northcote,  Sir  Stafford,  377. 

Northeastern  Boundary,  Sum 
ner's  letter  on,  58. 

OATH  of  office,  178;  "iron 
clad  oath,"  276. 

Ohio,  cost  of,  compared  with 
that  of  Harvard  College,  83. 

Oratory,  Sumner's,  385-388. 

Ostracism,  of  Sumner  in  Boston, 
98,  108 ;  of  anti-slavery  lead 
ers,  124;  by  Southern  sena 
tors,  suggested,  156,  178. 

PALFREY,  J.  G.,  87 ;  refuses  to 
vote  for  Winthrop,  113;  125  ; 
opposes  Sumner's  election, 
131  ;  opposes  revised  consti 
tution,  164;  182;  appointed 
postmaster  of  Boston,  245. 

Palmerston,  Lord,  on  7rent  Af 
fair,  255,  n.  I. 

Paris,  Sumner  in,  47-50,  58. 

Parker,  Theodore,    124;  greet 


ing  on  Sumner's  election, 
136;  147,  192,  201,  229,  238. 

Party,  Sumner's  attitude  toward, 
148,  1 86,  236. 

Peace  Conference,  Sumner  op 
poses  Massachusetts  being 
represented  at,  241. 

Peace  Prize,  Sumner's  gift  to 
Harvard  College,  96. 

Peace  Society,  Sumner's  rela 
tion  to  American,  95. 

Petition,  freedom  of,  cham 
pioned  by  Sumner,  178. 

Pettit,  John,  abuse  of  Sumner, 

I7'»  175- 

Phi  Beta  Kappa  Oration,  93. 

Philadelphia  Exposition,  Sum 
ner  on,  431. 

Phillips  friction  match  case,  67, 

Phillips,  Wendell,  schoolmate 
of  Sumner,  34 ;  87,  n.  I  ;  as 
serts  right  of  secession,  239 ; 
426. 

Phrenology,  interest  in,  74. 

Pierce,  Edward  L.,  "  Memoir 
and  Letters  of  Charles  Sum 
ner,"  7;  136,  n.  i;  147, 
n.  i  ;  262,  264,  323,  n. 
i;  371,  n.  i. 

Politics,  Sumner's  disgust  with, 
as  a  career,  40-41,  76. 

Postal  reform,  urged  by  Sumner, 
144,  380. 

Prescott,  William  H.,  64,  108, 
n.  i;  123,  169. 

Prison  discipline,  controversy 
over,  96-98. 

Pritchett,  Henry  S.,  on  negro 
suffrage,  448. 

Public  credit,  Sumner  in  de 
fense  of,  327,  379. 

RAILWAY,  first  ride  upon,  38. 
Reconstruction,    Sumner's   the 
ory  of    262,   283,  285,  441- 


INDEX 


4G3 


442  ;  Lincoln's  plan  of,  284 ; 
opposition  in  Congress,  285  ; 
Sumner  insists  on  congres 
sional  initiative,  286;  John 
son's  first  steps  in,  297  ; 
Sumner  demands  equal  civil 
rights,  301  ;  Johnson's  plan, 
303;  "Thorough,"  315; 
negro  suffrage  as  condition 
of,  316;  Sumner's  influence 
on,  441-448. 

Religion,  Sumner's  views  on, 
398-399 ;  in  relation  to  the 
state,  421. 

Representatives,  in  Massachu 
setts  legislature,  126;  in 
structed  to  vote  for  Sumner, 
133;  161-162. 

Republican  party,  Sumner's 
part  in  beginnings  of,  180, 
182. 

Retaliation,  act,  282-283  ;  pro 
posed  against  England,  320 ; 
for  arrest  of  American  citi 
zens,  321. 

Rhodes,  James  Ford,  quoted, 
340,  n.  i;  371,  n.  I  ;  446, 
n.  I  ;  447,  n.  I. 

Ristori,  Madame,  221. 

Rome,  study  in,  59-61  ;  love 
of,  227. 

Rose,  Sir  John,  354,  356,  362, 

364- 

Russell,  E.  Harlow,  on  Sum 
ner's  oratory,  385-386. 

Russell,  Earl,  on  Trent  seizure, 
255,  272,  275,  277. 


SAN  DOMINGO,  260;  Grant's 
steps  to  further  annexation 
of,  343  ;  question  before  com 
mittee  and  Senate,  350-352; 
commission  appointed,  360 ; 
Sumner's  speeches  on,  351, 


360,  372;  report  of  commis 
sion,  373. 

Saulsbury,  Senator,  277. 

Savage,  Senator,  210,  219. 

Schurz,  Carl,  51,  n.  I  ;  258,  n. 
2  ;  report  on  Southern  states, 

303-304  5339.373.  405,  413- 
414,  415,  432;  eulogy  on 
Sumner,  435. 

Scott,  General  Winfield,  239. 

Sculpture,  Sumner's  interest  in, 
60-61  ;  urges  a  higher  stand 
ard  of,  407,  n.  i. 

Senate,  Sumner's  first  impres 
sions  of,  40-41  ;  reluctance 
to  enter,  129;  nomination 
and  election,  130-135;  per 
sonnel  of,  140-141 ;  Sum 
ner's  later  attitude  toward, 
227  ;  reelection  opposed,  263 ; 
manners  in,  396-397. 

Seward,  William  H.,  96 ;  con 
gratulates  Sumner  on  elec 
tion,  136,  n.  2  ;  140 ;  votes 
on  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  157, 
180;  opposes  Kansas-Ne 
braska  Bill,  1 68;  in  Kansas 
debate,  192  ;  moves  commit 
tee  of  inquiry  on  Brooks  as 
sault,  205  ;  209  ;  keeps  Sum 
ner  off  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations,  218;  compromise 
programme,  239,  244 ;  de 
clares  slavery  will  remain 
unaffected  by  the  war,  247  ; 
approves  Trent  seizure,  252; 
on  giving  up  Mason  and 
Slidell,  254,  255,  n.  i  ;  at 
tempted  exclusion  of,  from 
cabinet,  266 ;  favors  letters 
of  marque  and  reprisal,  268  ; 
approves  Johnson's  recon 
struction  acts,  298 ;  blamed 
for  Johnson's  deeds,  312  ;  ac 
quisition  of  Alaska  by,  318. 


464 


INDEX 


Seward,  Mrs.  William  II.,  142, 

X57- 

Sherman,  John,  327 ;  on  Sum- 
ner's  removal  from  chairman 
ship,  367  ;  opinion  of  Sumner, 

435- 

Simms,  William  G.,  213. 

Sismondi,  on  American  slavery, 
101. 

Slavery,  94 ;  Sumner's  first 
sight  of,  100 ;  "  Slavery  sec 
tional,"  148 ;  impressions  of, 
185;  "The  Barbarism  of," 

233- 

Slave-trade,  treaty  for  sup 
pression  of,  259  ;  abolition  of 
coastwise,  277. 

Slidell,  John,  declines  to  dine 
with  Sumner,  74,  n.  I ;  on 
Brooks  assault,  205;  231; 
taken  from  Trent,  251. 

Smith,  Gerrit,  308,  n.  2. 

Smith,  Sydney,  Sumner's  visit 
with,  55. 

Soule,  Pierre,  Sumner  on,  140. 

South  Carolina,  part  of,  in  revo 
lution,  177 ;  compared  with 
Kansas,  197. 

Specie  payments,  Sumner  urges 
prompt  resumption  of,  327, 

379- 

Speech,  freedom  of,  Sumner 
champion  of,  178. 

St.  Thomas,  proposed  annex 
ation  of,  319. 

Stamp  Act,  compared  with  Fu 
gitive  Slave  Law,  153,  174. 

Stanton,  Edwin  M.,  243,  294, 

295- 

Stevens,  Thaddeus,  248,  n.  I  ; 
opposition  to  Johnson's  plans, 
296-297 ;  secures  appoint 
ment  of  Committee  on  Re 
construction,  302 ;  blames 
Sumner,  307 ;  institutes 


"  Thorough  "  policy,  3 1 5,  and 
n.  3  ;  324,  435,  443.  446- 
Story,    Joseph,    friendship    for 
the    Sumners,    34 ;    Sumner 
visits  in  Washington,  39  ;  41, 
46;  opinion   of  Sumner,  51, 
n.  I  j  61,  91,  94. 
Story,  William  Wetmore,  char 
acterization   of   Sumner,   37, 
68 ;  228  ;  on  Sumner's  appre 
ciation  of  art,  407-408. 
Style,  Sumner's,  in  oratory  and 

writing,  107,  385-386. 
Suffrage,  educational  or  prop 
erty  tests  for,  444.  See  Negro 
Suffrage.  Woman's,  309. 
Sumner,  Charles,  birth,  22 ;  at 
Latin  school,  23  ;  aspirations 
for  West  Point,  25  ;  at  Har 
vard,  26-28 ;  tramping  trip 
to  Saratoga,  29-30 ;  Daniel 
Webster  awards  prize  to,  32 ; 
experience  in  teaching,  33 ; 
chooses  law  as  profession,  34- 
37 ;  appearance  and  habits, 
36-37  ;  contributes  to  Amer 
ican  Jurist,  37  ;  visits  Wash 
ington,  39-41  ;  distaste  for 
politics  and  for  Senate,  40- 
41  ;  forms  partnership  with 
Hillard,  41  ;  lectures  in  law 
school,  editorial  work,  42- 
43;  the  "Five  of  Clubs," 
44;  European  trip,  45-63; 
return  to  Boston,  63;  new 
friends,  65-66;  death  of 
father,  66  ;  resumes  practice, 
66-69  ;  edits  Vesey's  "  Re 
ports,"  70-71 ;  serious  illness 
and  despondency,  71-72  ;  de 
fends  Commander  Mackenzie, 
in  Somers  mutiny  controversy, 
73 ;  interest  in  phrenology, 
74  {  works  with  Horace 
Mann  for  improvement  of 


INDEX 


465 


public  education,  75-76  ;  dis 
gust  with  American  political 
methods,  76 ;  delivers  ora 
tion,  "  The  True  Grandeur 
of  Nations,"  80-89 ;  eulogy 
of  Judge  Story,  91  ;  lectures 
before  Lyceums  and  colleges, 
92-93  ;  address  before  Peace 
Society,  95 ;  ostracized  in 
Boston,  for  part  in  Prison  Dis 
cipline  controversy,  96-98; 
allies  himself  with  anti-slav 
ery  men,  100-102  ;  contrib 
utor  to  Daily  Whig,  104; 
denounces  Winthrop's  Mex 
ican  War  vote,  105-107  ; 
speech  at  state  convention, 
109  ;  denounces  abduction  of 
a  fugitive  slave,  1 10  ;  refuses 
to  accept  nomination  for  Con 
gress,  in;  calls  for  with 
drawal  of  troops  from  Mex 
ico,  H2;  commends  Pal 
frey's  vote,  113;  part  in 
organizing  Free  Soil  party, 
116-118;  defeated  for  Con 
gress,  119;  favors  coalition 
with  Democrats,  120,  125- 
126  ;  defeated  for  Congress, 
123  ;  defends  Sims,  a  fugitive 
slave,  124;  denounces  Fugi 
tive  Slave  Law,  127  ;  nomi 
nated  for  Senate,  130;  dead 
lock  ends  in  his  election, 
130-134;  takes  oath  of  office, 
138;  treatment  by  colleagues, 
140;  life  in  Washington,  141 ; 
welcome  to  Kossuth,  142 ; 
secures  pardon  of  Drayton 
and  Say  res,  143 ;  favors 
land-grants  to  Iowa,  144 ; 
reproached  for  inaction,  145  ; 
attempt  to  address  Senate 
thwarted,  146 ;  speech, 
"  Freedom  national,  Slavery 


sectional,"  148-156;  in  Mas 
sachusetts  Free  Soil  Conven 
tion,  160;  Marshfield  elects 
to  constitutional  convention, 
161 ;  measures  he  favored, 
162;  champions  the  revised 
constitution,  163  ;  called  upon 
to  resign,  164;  omitted  from 
committee  list,  165 ;  signs 
"  Appeal  of  the  Independent 
Democrats,"  167  ;  opposes 
Kansas-Nebraska  Bill,  167- 
173 ;  champions  New  Eng 
land  clergy,  172;  defends 
Massachusetts  against  charge 
of  treason,  174;  expulsion 
mooted,  176;  asserts  right 
of  free  speech,  178;  op 
poses  Toucey's  bill,  184  ;  re 
jects  Know-Nothingism,  186; 
buys  slaves  for  John  A.  An 
drew,  184 ;  Western  tour,  184; 
criticizes  Douglas's  report  on 
Kansas,  191  ;  speech,  "  The 
Crime  Against  Kansas,"  193- 
199;  colloquy  with  Douglas, 
199-200;  assaulted  by 
Brooks,  204;  effects,  209; 
name  put  forward  for  Vice- 
President,  210;  academic 
recognition,  214 ;  public  re 
ception  in  Boston,  215-216; 
reelection,  217 ;  goes  to 
Europe  for  health,  221  ;  re 
sumes  seat  in  Senate  ,  223; 
forced  to  return  to  Europe, 
224  ;  treatment  by  moxa,  225, 
227;  first  attack  of  angina 
pectoris,  226;  winter  in 
Montpellier,  227 ;  Italian 
travel,  228-230 ;  return 
home,  230 ;  resumes  seat  in 
Senate,  assigned  to  Foreign 
Relations  Committee,  231  ; 
voted  for  in  Chicago  conven- 


466 


INDEX 


tion  for  presidency,  232; 
speech,  "  The  Barbarism  of 
Slavery,"  234;  Cooper  Insti 
tute  speech,  236;  lecture  on 
"  Lafayette,"  237  ;  opposes 
all  schemes  of  compromise, 
240 ;  believes  war  inevitable, 
241 ;  criticized  by  Boston 
City  Council,  242;  made 
chairman,  Committee  on  For 
eign  Relations,  244 ;  hunted 
by  Baltimore  mob,  245  ;  pro 
poses  programme  for  the 
administration,  247 ;  urges 
emancipation  on  Lincoln, 
248,  251,  259;  puts  the  issue 
before  Massachusetts  state 
convention,  249;  on  Trent 
seizure,  252,  255-257;  sup 
ports  treaty  for  suppression 
of  slave  trade,  259 ;  secures 
diplomatic  recognition  of 
Hayti,  San  Domingo  and  Li 
beria,  260;  succeeds  in  pass 
ing  anti- slavery  laws,  260- 
261 ;  begins  struggle  for 
equal  rights,  261  ;  propounds 
"state-suicide"  theory,  261; 
opposes  initiation  of  recon 
struction  by  President,  262; 
introduces  resolution  as  to 
battle-flags  and  paintings  in 
Capitol,  262 ;  supports  legal 
tender  acts,  263 ;  reelection 
threatened,  263 ;  endorsed  by 
Republican  convention,  264- 
265 ;  reflected,  266 ;  favors 
Seward's  elimination  from 
the  cabinet,  266;  on  Confis 
cation  Act,  267  ;  blocks  reso 
lution  on  French  intervention 
in  Mexico,  267-268;  stops 
privateering  policy,  268-269 ; 
resolutions  on  foreign  inter 
vention,  270;  Cooper  Insti 


tute  speech,  273-275 ;  secures 
repeal  of  Fugitive  Slave  Law, 
276;  urges  equal  rights  meas 
ures,  277-278;  relation  to 
Thirteenth  Amendment,  278; 
proposes  reform  of  civil  serv 
ice,  279-280 ;  opposes  renom- 
ination  of  Lincoln,  280; 
works  for  his  reelection,  281; 
secures  Chief-Justiceship  for 
Chase,  281 ;  on  Taney  me 
morial,  281 ;  secures  modifi 
cation  of  Retaliation  Act, 
283;  insists  Congress  must 
initiate  reconstruction,  286 ; 
opposes  recognition  of  Louis 
iana  government,  287-288 ; 
defeats  Lincoln's  plan,  289 ; 
escorts  President  and  Mrs. 
Lincoln  to  inauguration  ball, 
290;  accompanies  presiden 
tial  party  to  Richmond,  291 ; 
foresees  break  with  Lincoln 
on  reconstruction,  293 ;  at 
Lincoln's  death-bed,  293 ; 
eulogy  on  Lincoln,  294,  390  ; 
urges  negro  suffrage  upon 
Johnson,  295  ;  insists  upon  it 
as  preliminary  to  reconstruc 
tion,  299  ;  breaks  with  John 
son,  301 ;  presents  recon 
struction  programme,  301  ; 
denounces  Johnson's  "  white 
washing  "  message  and  ap 
pointments,  304;  blocks  first 
form  of  Fourteenth  Amend 
ment,  306-307  ;  offers  new 
draft,  307  ;  on  committee  on 
District  of  Columbia,  308 ; 
opposes  hasty  trial  of  Jeffer 
son  Davis,  309;  blocks  re 
taliation  against  England, 
309-311 ;  advocates  interna 
tional  copyright  and  metric 
system,  311  ;  death  of  mother, 


467 


311;  marriage,  311,  402- 
403 ;  denounces  Johnson, 
312 ;  urges  extension  of  Ten 
ure  of  Office  Bill,  312 ;  insists 
on  negro  suffrage  in  Ne 
braska,  314;  declares  ac 
ceptance  of  Fourteent h. 
Amendment  only  an  instal 
ment  of  reconstruction,  315  ; 
successful  appeal  to  caucus  on 
negro  suffrage,  316;  tries  to 
secure  homesteads  and  schools 
for  freedmen,  317  ;  advocates 
Alaska  purchase,  318-319; 
Western  lecture  tour,  320; 
part  in  Johnson  impeachment 
trial,  322-326  ;  urges  prompt 
resumption  of  specie  pay 
ments,  327  ;  attitude  toward 
Fifteenth  Amendment,  32&_^ 
opposed  to  Grant's  nomina 
tion,  329-330;  elected  for 
fourth  term,  330 ;  blocks  ap 
pointment  of  Stewart,  332 ; 
intimacy  with  Fish,  334 ;  re 
lation  to  Motley's  appoint 
ment,  336;  opposes  Johnson- 
Clarendon  Convention,  337- 
338;  tension  over  Motley, 
347  ;  urged  by  Grant  to  sup 
port  San  Domingo  treaties, 
349;  opposes  annexation  of 
San  Domingo,  350-352;  of 
fered  London  mission,  352; 
antagonism  toward  Grant, 
359;  speech,  "  Naboth's 
Vineyard,"  360 ;  insulted  by 
Fish,  361 ;  rupture  with  Fish, 
362-363 ;  memorandum  on 
terms  of  settlement  with  Eng 
land,  363;  removed  from 
chairmanship  of  Committee 
on  Foreign  Relations,  365- 
371;  third  speech  on  San 
Domingo,  372-373  ;  supports 


Treaty  of  Washington,  377 ; 
favors  new  "  fundamental 
conditions  "  of  reconstruction, 
380 ;  urges  changes  in  law  of 
naturalization,  381 ;  illness, 
382  ;  opposes  Butler's  candi 
dacy  for  governor,  383;  per 
sonality,  384-411;  religious 
views,  398-399;  secures  of 
fice  for  Hawthorne,  400-402; 
marriage  and  divorce,  402- 
403;  home  in  Washington, 
403-405 ;  lack  of  humor,  406- 
407  ;  appreciation  of  art,  407- 
408;  craving  for  approval, 
408-410;  urged  to  join  Lib 
eral  Republicans,  41 5 ;  consid 
ered  as  presidential  candi 
date,  416;  speech,  "Repub 
licanism  vs.  Grantism,"  418; 
last  trip  to  Europe,  420-422  ; 
introduces  "  Battle-Flag  Reso 
lution,"  423;  censured  by 
Massachusetts  legislature, 
424;  struggle  to  complete 
Works,  425  ;  election  to  Mas 
sachusetts  Historical  Society, 
426 ;  renewed  friendship  with 
Hillard,  427,  and  n.  I ;  urges 
Civil  Rights  Bill,  429  ;  favors 
Gushing  for  Chief-Justice, 
430;  censure  rescinded,  431- 
432  ;  illness  and  death,  432- 
433 ;  funeral  ceremonies, 
433-434;  Lamar's  eulogy, 
436-437 ;  Sumner's  leader 
ship,  438-45 1 ;  part  in  re 
construction,  441-448  ;  prac 
tical  statesmanship,  448-451. 

Sumner,  Charles  Pinckney,  18; 
marriage,  19;  sheriff  of  Suf 
folk  County,  20;  character 
istics,  21;  anxiety  as  to  son's 
education,  25  ;  death,  66. 

Sumner,  George,  66,  134,  248. 


468 


INDEX 


Sumner,  Job,  16-18. 

Sumner,  Relief  (Jacob),  22, 311. 

Supreme  Court,  Sumner's  ob 
servations  of,  39;  attitude 
toward  its  decisions,  152. 

TANEY,  CHIEF- JUSTICE,  281, 
282. 

Tariff,  Sumner's  votes  on,  218. 

Taylor,  Zachary,  nomination  of, 
116,  117,  n.  i. 

Temperance,  Sumner's  relation 
to  the  movement,  74,  397. 

Tenure  of  Office  Act,  312-313. 

Territories,  organization  of,  240, 
n.  I. 

Texas,  opposition  to  annexation 
of,  in  Massachusetts,  99 ; 
Sumner  on,  103. 

Thayer,  Eli,  and  Emigrant  Aid 
Company,  189. 

Thirteenth  Amendment,  Sum 
ner  drafts  form  of,  278 ;  Mis 
sissippi  refuses  to  ratify,  299 ; 
powers  under,  306. 

Tocqueville,  A.  de,  221,  222. 

Toombs,  Robert,  attitude  to 
ward  Brooks  assault,  205, 
207. 

Topeka  Constitution,  190. 

Toucey,  Isaac,  178,  183. 

Trent  Affair,  251. 

Trumbull,      Lyman,      opp 

Seward,  266,  282,  n.  I ;  286, 
,287,369,415. 

VESEY'S    "  Reports,"     Sumner 

edits,  70-71. 
Victoria,   Sumner     present     at 

coronation  of,  53. 
Virginius  case,  Sumner  on,  427- 

428. 

WADE,  B.  F.,  140,  157;  on 
freedom  of  speech  and  the 


Brooks  assault,  208 ;  288,  297, 
308,  331,  n.  I ;  361  ;  favors 
annexation  of  San  Domingo, 

373.  »•  I- 

War,  Sumner's  denunciation  of, 
82-89,  94;  changed  attitude 
toward,  246. 

Washington,  D.  C,  Sumner's 
first  visit  to,  39-41. 

Washington,  George,  on  capture 
of  fugitive  slave,  154-155. 

Washington,  Treaty  of,  356. 

Webster,  Daniel,  awards  prize 
to  Sumner,  32 ;  argues  case 
before  Supreme  Court,  39 ; 
on  Creole  case,  102;  urged 
by  Sumner  to  champion 
freedom,  109,  n.  I  ;  Seventh 
of  March  Speech,  121-122; 
123;  enforces  Fugitive  Slave 
Law,  124;  last  visit  to  Sen 
ate,  156. 

Welles,  Gideon,  8;  on  Trent 
Affair,  25 1-252 ;  on  privateer 
ing,  269,  298. 

West  Point,  Sumner's  wish  to 
enter,  25  ;  visits,  29. 

West  Virginia,  Sumner  opposed 
to  admission,  261. 

Whipple,  E.  P.,  92. 

White,  Andrew  D.,  358,  n.  I ; 
commissioner  to  San  Do 
mingo,  361  ;  on  annexation 
of  San  Domingo,  373,  n.  I. 

Whittier,  John  G.,  102,  402; 
leads  movement  to  rescind 
censure  of  Sumner,  424,  431. 

Wilkes,  Captain,  251-252. 

Wilson,  Henry,  103;  at  Phil 
adelphia  convention,  1 16;  de 
nounces  Webster,  125;  130; 
credited  by  Sumner  with  his 
election,  136;  145,  147,  161 ; 
defeated  for  governor,  163, 
164;  dallies  with  Know- 


INDEX  469 

Nothings,  182  ;  elected  to  Winthrop,  Robert  C.,  88,  104  ; 
Senate,  182 ;  on  conditions  vote  on  Mexican  War  Bill 
in  Kansas,  190;  205,  208;  criticized,  104-107;  Sum- 
declines  duel  with  Brooks,  ner's  controversy  with,  105- 
212;  on  Brooks's  death,  107;  Sumner  refuses  to  run 
219;  238;  opposes  Sumner's  against,  for  Congress,  ill; 
resolutions,  262;  candidate  opposed  to  Sumner  in  state 
for  Vice-President,  417  ;  426,  convention,  113;  appointed 
434.  to  Senate,  123;  388. 


(p 


RETURN  TO  the  circulation  desk  of  any 
University  of  California  Library 

or  to  the 

NORTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 
Bldg.  400,  Richmond  Field  Station 
University  of  California 
Richmond,  CA  94804-4698 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

•  2-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling 
(510)642-6753 

•  1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing 
books  to  NRLF 

•  Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4 
days  prior  to  due  date. 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


APR  2  6  ZOO! 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

! 


